Ms K Sylvester v Stuart Phillpson and 2 others — 2025

The claimant, who had dyspraxia, unintentionally used the incorrect pronoun for a transgender colleague. The tribunal found that her dyspraxia affected her short-term memory and meant it took her longer to consistently adopt the correct pronouns. It accepted on the balance of probabilities that the incorrect pronoun use, including persistent misuse, arose in consequence of her disability.

The tribunal found that the respondents' findings of harassment under the Dignity at Work and Study process, at investigation and appeal stages, amounted to unfavourable treatment because of something arising from disability. It accepted that the respondents had legitimate aims connected with applying their policy and maintaining an environment free from harassment, but held that the means used were not proportionate. The tribunal identified less discriminatory measures, including exploring the claimant's dyspraxia during the process, mediation, less restrictive working arrangements, and clearer decisions about whether further disciplinary steps should follow.

For indirect disability discrimination, the tribunal found that the internal guidance treating intentional or persistent incorrect pronoun use as harassment was a PCP applied to the claimant and others, and that it placed disabled people with short-term memory problems, including the claimant, at a particular disadvantage. The tribunal again found that the respondents had not shown the PCP's application to the claimant was proportionate.

The harassment complaint was dismissed because, although some alleged acts were found to be unwanted and to have the relevant effect, the tribunal did not find they were related to disability. The victimisation complaint was dismissed because the tribunal found the claimant had not expressly or impliedly raised race discrimination in the 3 February 2023 conversation relied on as the protected act. Remedy was left to a further hearing.