Case 2301291/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Cloono v London Ambulance Service NHS Trust — 2024
- Case reference
- 2301291/2023
- Decision date
- 4 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heath
- Venue
- London South
- Panel members
- Ms A Boyce, Mr R Singh
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Cloono
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at London South on 25, 26, 27 and 28 November 2024 before Employment Judge Heath, Ms A Boyce and Mr R Singh. The claimant, Mrs L Cloono, was represented by herself and the respondent, London Ambulance Service NHS Trust, was represented by Ms J Whiteley, solicitor advocate.
The written judgment records that the claimant's claims of direct disability discrimination, breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments and unfair dismissal were not well-founded and were dismissed. The judgment does not set out written reasons because reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the written record only records the result.
No monetary award is recorded in the written judgment. The decision was sent to the parties on 4 December 2024.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination claim dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim for breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Unfair dismissal claim dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.