Case 2212736/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Saunders v Peloton interactive UK Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 2212736/2023
- Decision date
- 6 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Nash
- Venue
- London Central
- Panel members
- Ms N Sandler, Mr S Pearlman
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Saunders
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at London Central before Employment Judge Nash with Ms N Sandler and Mr S Pearlman, heard Mr C Saunders's disability discrimination claims against Peloton Interactive UK Ltd between 20 and 31 January 2025. It rejected the claims of direct discrimination under section 13 Equality Act 2010, indirect discrimination under section 19, and discrimination arising from disability under section 15.
The tribunal also rejected the disability harassment and victimisation claims. It upheld the reasonable adjustments complaint under sections 20 and 21 Equality Act 2010, but only in relation to rest breaks and the requirement that the claimant work in public-facing areas. The extracted judgment text does not record any monetary award or other remedy figure.
Claims and outcomes
6 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 | Direct discrimination contrary to section 13 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Indirect discrimination contrary to section 19 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability contrary to section 15 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Failure to comply with the duty to make reasonable adjustments contrary to sections 20 and 21 Equality Act 2010, but only in respect of rest breaks and the requirement to work in public-facing areas. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Harassment related to disability contrary to section 26 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation contrary to section 27 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability |
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.