Case 2402085/2024 · Employment Tribunal
(1) Miss S Glynn (2) Mrs T Bryant v Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust — 2026
- Case reference
- 2402085/2024
- Decision date
- 13 February 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dunlop Representation
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
(1) Miss S Glynn (2) Mrs T Bryant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that both claimants' complaint that the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments was well-founded. It found that the respondent breached its duty by failing to allow the claimants to continue working in their roles without seeking to redeploy them into community or administrative posts, despite their exemption from completing PMVA Level 4 training.
The tribunal also found that both claimants' complaint of discrimination arising from disability was well-founded in relation to preventing them from working bank shifts and night shifts and requiring them to seek redeployment, and found that the discrimination was not justified. It recorded limits to that finding, including that the respondent was entitled to limit access to bank shifts in wards other than Heathfield House and to prevent night shifts where the 'rule of 3' would not be met. The indirect discrimination complaint was dismissed upon withdrawal, Mrs Bryant's disability-related harassment complaint was dismissed, and Mrs Bryant's unfair dismissal complaint was well-founded.
Claims and outcomes
5 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The complaint that the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments under ss.20-21 Equality Act 2010 was well-founded. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The complaint of discrimination arising from disability was well-founded, with some alleged acts not found to be discriminatory. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The complaint of indirect discrimination was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Mrs Bryant's complaint of disability-related harassment was not well founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Mrs Bryant's complaint of unfair dismissal was well-founded. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- ss.20-21 Equality Act 2010
- s.13 Equality Act 2010
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.