In person For the v Ms C Patience, Solicitor — 2021

The claimant had worked for the respondent since 2001 and relied on osteoarthritis as her disability; the respondent accepted that she was disabled for Equality Act purposes. After a restructuring she moved into an Executive Offices role, and the claims concerned events in 2017 to 2019, including requests to take minutes, the offering of an acting-up Band 5 role to JP, grievance handling, performance management, comments about retirement, and the eventual dismissal for capability.

The tribunal held that alleged acts before 10 August 2018 were out of time and refused to extend time on a just and equitable basis. It treated the grievance-handling matters that continued until the appeal outcome on 6 November 2018 as in time, but found no age or disability discrimination or harassment on the facts. It found that EC's request that the claimant take minutes was based on the belief that minute-taking remained part of the role, that JP was offered the acting-up role because she was considered the most qualified, and that the claimant herself introduced the performance discussion at the 23 August 2017 facilitated meeting. It also found that the tea and coffee issue did not amount to less favourable treatment, that TB's retirement comment was made in the context of a supportive discussion, and that the grievance process did not establish discriminatory treatment.

The tribunal also rejected the section 15 claim because the performance management discussion was not imposed on the claimant in the way alleged. On unfair dismissal, it accepted that the dismissal was for capability arising from long-term sickness absence. The respondent had held repeated absence review meetings, sought occupational health advice, and by the final review the claimant had been off work continuously for 16 months, remained unfit for work, and had no foreseeable return date. The tribunal held that dismissal was fair in all the circumstances and dismissed all claims.