Ms Bindhu Viswambaran v John Lewis plc — 2025

The tribunal found that the claimant was disabled by a mental health condition and by a physical impairment affecting pain, dizziness, walking and carrying, but that the mental health condition was not relevant to the claims. The whistleblowing detriment claims failed because the tribunal found no credible evidence that any alleged protected disclosure had a material influence on the decisions complained of; several alleged detriments were also found not to be detriments or to have ordinary workplace explanations.

The disability discrimination claims failed. On reasonable adjustments, the tribunal found that the respondent engaged with the claimant's requests, made or offered adjustments including altered hours, lighter duties, no lifting above 3 kg, breaks, and access to Sunday work where possible, and was not obliged to implement every suggestion on GP fit notes. The section 15 claims failed because the tribunal was not satisfied that the claimant's underperformance or the March 2023 unauthorised absence arose in consequence of disability; it also found that, if necessary, the respondent's approach to attendance was proportionate to legitimate staffing aims.

The unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal claims failed. The tribunal found that the claimant had agreed to return with adjustments, attended on 8 February 2023, then failed to attend work in March 2023 without adequate explanation or a new fit note. It found that the respondent honestly and reasonably treated the absence as unauthorised serious misconduct, that dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses, that the appeal process was open to a reasonable employer, and that the conduct amounted to a fundamental breach disentitling the claimant to notice pay. The unlawful deduction and victimisation allegations concerning February 2023 pay failed because the tribunal accepted the respondent's payroll evidence that the claimant received the pay due to her.