Case 2303104/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss D Quinlan v Department of Work and Pensions — 2024
- Case reference
- 2303104/2022
- Decision date
- 8 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Reed
- Panel members
- Mr P Dodd, Mrs N Christofi
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss D Quinlan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at London South by video on 5, 6, 7 and 8 August 2024 before Employment Judge Reed with lay members Mr P Dodd and Mrs N Christofi, determined three complaints brought by Miss D Quinlan against the Department of Work and Pensions. It dismissed the complaint of unfair dismissal, recording that the dismissal was fair and that the claim was not well-founded.
It also dismissed the claimant's complaint of direct disability discrimination, finding that it was not well-founded. The separate complaint of harassment relating to disability was likewise dismissed as not well-founded. No monetary award was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the complaint was not well-founded and that the claimant was fairly dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The complaint of direct disability discrimination was found not well-founded. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The harassment complaint related to disability and was found not well-founded. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.