Case 2306221/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Navashanker Wignarajah v John Lewis plc — 2025
- Case reference
- 2306221/2023
- Decision date
- 5 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kelly
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Navashanker Wignarajah
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Kelly, sitting alone by video in London South on 8 August 2025, dismissed the claimant’s disability discrimination claim and her claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments against John Lewis Plc.
The tribunal found that the claimant did not have a disability within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010 during the relevant period. That finding disposed of both claims.
Reasons were given orally. The written record also notes that no written reasons would be provided unless a written request was made within 14 days of the decision being sent.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Disability discrimination claim dismissed because the tribunal found the claimant did not have a disability under the Equality Act 2010 during the relevant period. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments claim dismissed because the tribunal found the claimant did not have a disability under the Equality Act 2010 during the relevant period. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.