Mrs Noreen Ali v Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust — 2024

The tribunal found that the claimant was disabled at the material time by reason of ADHD and that the respondent had knowledge of that disability from 16 August 2021. It found that the claimant had not established disability within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010 in respect of back pain, dyslexia, dyspraxia or lower limb pain. The tribunal did not make a formal disability finding on anxiety and depression because the pleaded discrimination allegations did not rely on it.

The harassment complaints were dismissed. The tribunal preferred the respondent witnesses' evidence where accounts conflicted and found that key alleged incidents involving Anne-Marie Harris and Matthew Bradshaw either did not occur as alleged or did not have the purpose or effect required by s26 Equality Act 2010. It also found that Ellin Swanborough's reference to communication being perceived differently did not amount to harassment related to disability.

The indirect discrimination and reasonable adjustments complaints were dismissed. The tribunal did not accept that there was a hot-desking PCP in the asserted form, found that the claimant had only attended the office on a small number of days, and found no substantial disadvantage from the alleged lack of a guaranteed quiet desk or ergonomic furniture. It also found that the requested equipment and software had not been shown to be required to avoid a substantial disadvantage, and in any event relevant equipment was provided within a reasonable period.

The victimisation complaints were dismissed. Although the tribunal accepted that the claimant had done protected acts, it found that the referral to a possible dismissal meeting, the dismissal for some other substantial reason, and the dismissal appeal outcome were because the respondent considered there had been an irretrievable breakdown in working relationships, not because of the protected acts.