Case 2200523/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms D’Souza (Counsel) For the v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 2200523/2024
- Decision date
- 22 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Webster
- Venue
- London Central
- Panel members
- Mr Benson, Ms Olulode
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Ms D’Souza (Counsel) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant, Mr Matthew Colliander-Smith, brought claims against Veritas Asset Management LLP under the Equality Act 2010 for discrimination arising in consequence of disability (s15), failure to make reasonable adjustments (s20 and s21), and victimisation (s27). The Respondent had conceded disability prior to the hearing, so that question was not in issue. The hearing took place at London Central Employment Tribunal over eight days between 22 April and 1 May 2025, with the panel reconvening in chambers on 9 and 10 June 2025.
The Tribunal, comprising Employment Judge Webster sitting with Mr Benson and Ms Olulode, considered the agreed list of issues and applied the guidance in Pnaiser v NHS England to the s15 analysis, alongside the relevant statutory provisions and authorities including Archibald v Fife Council in respect of reasonable adjustments. The Claimant withdrew his claim in relation to Detriment 13 at the conclusion of the hearing. Following written submissions and deliberations, the Tribunal did not uphold any of the claims advanced.
The alleged detriments addressed adjustments to the Claimant's discretionary profit share and fixed profit allocation, changes to his role, removal of systems access, the conduct and characterisation of a 26 June 2023 meeting concerning a new Head of Investment Risk and Data Analytics role, the rejection of his candidacy for that role, and the eventual termination of his LLP membership on 4 September 2023. As all liability claims were dismissed, no remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Section 15 Equality Act 2010 claim (discrimination arising in consequence of disability) was not upheld. Disability had been conceded by the Respondent prior to the hearing. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Sections 20 and 21 Equality Act 2010 claim (failure to make reasonable adjustments) was not upheld. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | Section 27 Equality Act 2010 claim was not upheld. The Respondent had accepted that the Claimant's email of 29 March 2023 to Sandra Phelan was a protected act. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
8 references- s.15 Equality Act 2010
- s.20 Equality Act 2010
- s.21 Equality Act 2010
- s.27 Equality Act 2010
- Pnaiser v NHS England [2016] IRLR 170
- Nagarajan v London Regional Transport [1999] IRLR 572
- Land Registry v Houghton UKEAT/0149/14
- Archibald v Fife Council [2004] ICR 95
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.