Case 2307988/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Grant Bish v Tinklin Springall — 2025
- Case reference
- 2307988/2023
- Decision date
- 3 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lumby Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Grant Bish
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Bish brought complaints of harassment and direct and indirect discrimination on grounds of religion or belief, based on beliefs about medical autonomy, homeopathic remedies and a rejection of Covid-19 vaccinations. The tribunal held that those beliefs did not amount to a protected characteristic within section 10 Equality Act 2010, and the religion or belief complaints were dismissed.
On disability, the tribunal found that from 8 March 2022 Mr Bish was a disabled person within section 6 Equality Act 2010 because of depression, anxiety and suicidal ideation, but that he was not disabled by reason of a tumour on his eyelid. The harassment, indirect disability discrimination, unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability, and failure to make reasonable adjustments complaints could therefore proceed insofar as they related to the former conditions, and were dismissed insofar as they related to the eyelid tumour. The judgment determined those preliminary issues only and recorded no remedy.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harassment | The claimant's beliefs about medical autonomy, homeopathic remedies and a rejection of Covid-19 vaccinations did not amount to a protected characteristic for the purposes of section 10 Equality Act 2010; the religion or belief harassment complaint was dismissed. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The claimant's direct and indirect discrimination complaints on grounds of religion or belief were dismissed on the same basis. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Harassment | From 8 March 2022 the claimant was a disabled person within section 6 Equality Act 2010 because of depression, anxiety and suicidal ideation. The harassment complaint could proceed insofar as it related to those conditions, but was dismissed insofar as it related to a tumour on his eyelid. | Other | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The complaints of indirect disability discrimination, unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability, and failure to make reasonable adjustments could proceed insofar as they related to depression, anxiety and suicidal ideation. The same complaints were dismissed insofar as they related to the eyelid tumour, because the tribunal found he was not disabled by reason of that condition. | Other | 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.