Ms C Wilson v South London and Maudsley NHS Trust — 2019

The claimant, Ms C Wilson, brought disability discrimination complaints against South London and Maudsley NHS Trust arising from a 26 July 2019 telephone call and a follow-up meeting on 3 September 2019. The protected characteristic relied on was disability, namely anxiety and depression. The tribunal held that any allegation before 2 August 2019 was out of time, so the 26 July incident was time-barred and no case was advanced for extension of time or continuing act.

On the merits of the 26 July telephone call, the tribunal found that Ms Gower called the claimant after a locum nurse, SR, complained in writing that the claimant had approached him about bullying and pressure from management and had said she would speak to him again later. The tribunal found that Ms Gower did not accuse the claimant of bullying; rather, she was referring to SR’s concern that the claimant had asked whether he felt bullied and pressured. It held that the call was a management response to an unwelcome approach and that the claimant had not shown a substantial disadvantage, nor identified reasonable steps the respondent should have taken before the call.

In relation to the 3 September 2019 meeting, the tribunal found that the claimant was on notice of a follow-up discussion when she returned from leave and that there was no PCP of disallowing a support companion. It found that, on the facts, the claimant had not asked in advance to be accompanied and that Ms Gower would have allowed a companion if one had been arranged without delaying the meeting. The tribunal also rejected the suggested disadvantage, noting that the claimant had attended other meetings unaccompanied and that there was no occupational health advice requiring accompaniment.

The harassment allegation also failed. The tribunal found that the alleged bullying accusation during the 26 July call did not happen, and that the 3 September meeting without a support companion was not shown to be conduct related to disability. In any event, the meeting was found not to have the purpose or effect of violating the claimant’s dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. The claims were dismissed in their entirety.