Case 2201193/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms B Omorawa v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea FULL MERITS LIABILITY AND REMEDY HEARING Heard in person on 20-25 May 2024 — 2024
- Case reference
- 2201193/2023
- Decision date
- 31 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Nicolle Non-legal
- Panel members
- Ms C Jones, Mr T Harrington-Roberts
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms B Omorawa
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal upheld Ms B Omorawa's claim under sections 20 and 21 of the Equality Act 2010 in relation to the Respondent's failure to take account of her needs when choosing the location of a locker between 2 August and 4 August 2022. That was the successful reasonable adjustments claim identified in the judgment.
A separate reasonable adjustments claim was dismissed. It concerned the PCPs of not allocating lockers to employees promptly when they started work with the Respondent, and not having a policy for assessing employees' home working arrangements and any adjustments needed in their homes before requiring them to work from home.
For the successful claim, the tribunal awarded £3,000 for injury to feelings. It also awarded interest at 8% under the Employment Tribunals (Interest on Awards in Discrimination Cases) Regulations 1996, calculated from 2 August 2022 to 24 May 2024 over 662 days, producing £435.29 interest and a total sum payable of £3,435.29. The judgment states that the injury to feelings award was tax free because it was unrelated to the termination of employment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Claim under sections 20 and 21 of the Equality Act 2010 for not taking into account the Claimant's needs when choosing the location of a locker between 2 August and 4 August 2022. | Upheld | Disability | £3,000 |
| Disability discrimination | Separate reasonable adjustments claim under sections 20 and 21 of the Equality Act 2010 concerning the PCPs of not allocating lockers to employees promptly when they started work and not having a policy to assess home working arrangements and needed home adjustments before requiring work from home. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,435
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- Equality Act 2010 sections 20 and 21
- Employment Tribunals (Interest on Awards in Discrimination Cases) Regulations 1996
- s.17 of the Judgments Act 1838
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.