Case 2403044/2016 · Employment Tribunal
Samantha Walker v The Co-Operative Group Ltd and 1 other — 2018
- Case reference
- 2403044/2016
- Decision date
- 17 August 2018
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sherratt
- Panel members
- Ms L Atkinson, Mr W Haydock
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Samantha Walker
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought multiple claims against the Co-operative Group Limited (First Respondent) and Richard Pennycook (Second Respondent), including unfair dismissal, equal pay, direct sex discrimination, associative disability discrimination, and other heads. The hearing took place at Manchester over August and October 2018 before a full panel.
The Tribunal found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed by the First Respondent, that her work was equal to that of her named comparators following a job evaluation study (with the material-factor defence failing), and that the respondents directly discriminated against her on the ground of sex in grading her 2015 performance as only 'partially achieved' without an adequate year-end appraisal. All other claims were dismissed, including a section-15 Equality Act 2010 complaint of associative disability discrimination which the Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to consider on the basis that section 15 does not extend to associative claims of this kind. The parties were invited to seek to resolve the question of remedy between themselves, with the option of applying for a remedy hearing if they could not.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Ordinary unfair dismissal against the First Respondent (Co-operative Group Limited) succeeded. | Upheld | — | — |
| Equal pay | Claimant's work was rated equal to that of her named comparators in a job evaluation study, from a date to be determined. The respondents' material-factor defence failed. | Upheld | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | Direct sex discrimination in relation to the decision to grade the claimant's 2015 performance as 'partially achieved' without an adequate year-end appraisal. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Disability discrimination | Associative disability discrimination claim under section 15 Equality Act 2010 failed. Tribunal concluded it had no jurisdiction to consider a section-15 complaint where the disabled person is an associated disabled person rather than the claimant herself. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Other | All other pleaded claims (including any whistleblowing/automatic unfair dismissal limb) were dismissed against both respondents. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- section 15 Equality Act 2010
- Coleman v Attridge Law (associative disability discrimination)
- section 98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996
- material factor defence (equal pay)
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.