Case 2213184/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Alison McRobbie v Department for Work and Pensions — 2024
- Case reference
- 2213184/2024
- Decision date
- 18 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rayner
- Venue
- Southampton
- Panel members
- Ms Lloyd Jennings, Mr P Flannagan
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Alison McRobbie
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the Claimant was disabled by physical impairments from the start of employment and by PTSD from 2022. Most disability discrimination allegations were dismissed. It found that managers had generally taken steps to support home working, workplace adjustments, occupational health referrals and return-to-office arrangements, although the Respondent did not properly address whether disability-related attendance trigger points should be adjusted.
The failure to consider and apply disability trigger points was held to be a failure to make reasonable adjustments. The tribunal found this caused concern and stress about possible formal attendance action, but noted that no formal attendance warning was issued and that HAIM meetings were treated as supportive in practice.
One harassment allegation succeeded. The tribunal found that a colleague made a comment linking the Claimant's DSE chair with Stephen Hawking, that the comment was unwanted and related to disability, and that in the circumstances it was reasonable to treat it as having the statutory effect. Other harassment, direct discrimination, discrimination arising from disability and victimisation allegations were dismissed.
The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed. The tribunal found that the Respondent carried out a fair investigation, disciplinary process and appeal into alleged inappropriate access to DWP systems, had reasonable grounds for its belief in gross misconduct, and that summary dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses.
Claims and outcomes
8 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 disability discrimination under section 13 Equality Act 2010 was dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability under section 15 Equality Act 2010 was dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments was upheld only in relation to the failure to consider/calculating disability trigger points for attendance management. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Other reasonable adjustment allegations were dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Disability-related harassment was upheld only in relation to the comment made by Ms Hooper/Josie comparing the Claimant's DSE chair to Stephen Hawking. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Harassment | All other disability-related harassment allegations were dismissed. | Dismissed |
Legal tests applied
30 references- Chapman v Simon
- section 13 Equality Act 2010
- section 136 Equality Act 2010
- Ministry of Defence v Jeremiah
- Shamoon v RUC
- Nagarajan v London Regional Transport
- Igen v Wong
- Madarassy v Nomura International plc
- section 15 Equality Act 2010
- Basildon and Thurrock NHS v Weerasinghe
- Hall v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police
- iForce Ltd v Wood
- Pnaiser v NHS England
- A Ltd v Z
- City of York Council v Grosset
- sections 20 and 21 Equality Act 2010
- Archibald v Fife Council
- EHRC Employment Code
- Project Management Institute v Latif
- Nottingham City Transport Ltd v Harvey
- Davies v EE Ltd
- Bethnal Green & Shoreditch Educational Trust v Dippenaar
- Hilaire v Luton BC
- Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Trust v Bagley
- Sheikholeslami v University of Edinburgh
- Griffiths v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
- Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Local Health Board v Morgan
- Tarbuck v Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd
- Cosgrove v Caesar and Howie
- Smith v Churchills Stairlifts plc Udemma Lawrence v Birmingham City Council Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust v Foster Romec Ltd v Rudham South Staffordshire and Shropshire Healthcare NHS Foundation U
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.