Case 2303818/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v London United Busways Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2303818/2018
- Decision date
- 14 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cheetham QC
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing determined whether the Claimant was disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010 and considered an application to amend. The tribunal recorded that the existing case concerned unfair constructive dismissal, wrongful dismissal and failure to make reasonable adjustments, arising from the Claimant's requests to be taken off night shifts, but those claims were not finally determined.
On disability, the tribunal accepted that the Claimant had depression over a lengthy period, with repeated GP references, anti-depressive medication, a mental health referral and symptoms affecting sleep, energy, concentration, social interaction and ordinary tasks. Although many absences correlated with stressful life events, the tribunal found that the impairment was not confined to those events and had a substantial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities at the relevant time.
On amendment, the tribunal allowed the Claimant to add a complaint of failing to provide employment particulars, which the Respondent accepted could be added. It refused permission to add two further PCPs and a new Equality Act 2010 s.15 claim, finding that these would substantially extend the case and that the Respondent would suffer prejudice at that late stage, while the Claimant could still pursue the existing PCP identified at the preliminary hearing.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary issue only: the tribunal found that the Claimant was disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010. The underlying disability discrimination complaints, including failure to make reasonable adjustments, were not finally determined in this judgment. | Other | Disability | — |
| Other | The tribunal allowed an amendment to add a complaint of failing to provide employment particulars under Employment Act 2002 s.38. The merits of that complaint were not determined. | Other | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal refused permission to amend to add an Equality Act 2010 s.15 claim and refused permission to add two further PCPs to the reasonable adjustments claim. This was an amendment decision, not a final merits determination. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- Equality Act 2010 s.6(1)
- Aderemi v London and South Eastern Railway Ltd [2013] ICR 591
- Morgan v Staffordshire University [2002] ICR 475
- Royal Bank of Scotland Plc v Morris UKEAT/0436/10
- Selkent Bus Co Ltd v Moore [1996] ICR 836
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.