Case 2403284/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Ms. H. Melville v Santander UK plc — 2018
- Case reference
- 2403284/2018
- Decision date
- 3 October 2018
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T Vincent Ryan
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms. H. Melville
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing, the claimant withdrew three claims: a victimisation claim about ACAS Early Conciliation, an indirect disability discrimination claim about withheld pay after contractual sick pay was exhausted, and a discrimination arising from disability claim about contact concerning her grievance while her line manager was on annual leave. Those withdrawn claims were dismissed.
The Tribunal postponed the contested issue of whether the claimant was a disabled person for the purposes of the proceedings to the final hearing. It held that the disability discrimination claims were presented in time when measured from the last of a series of alleged acts, and that in any event time would have been extended on just and equitable principles.
On the respondent's application, one constructive unfair dismissal claim based on itemised payslips was dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success. Other claims were made subject to deposit orders because they had little reasonable prospect of success, including a constructive unfair dismissal claim based on holiday pay and several disability-related harassment, discrimination arising from disability, direct discrimination, and reasonable adjustments allegations. Save for those rulings, the respondent's application to strike out or impose deposit orders on the remaining constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims was dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
10 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Victimisation | The claimant withdrew the victimisation claim alleging failure to engage with ACAS Early Conciliation, and it was dismissed. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The claimant withdrew the indirect discrimination claim concerning withheld pay after contractual sick pay was exhausted, and it was dismissed. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The claimant withdrew the discrimination because of something arising from disability claim concerning failure to contact her about her grievance while her line manager was on annual leave, and it was dismissed. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Constructive dismissal | The constructive unfair dismissal claim based on asserted statutory rights to receive itemised payslips was dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Constructive dismissal | The constructive unfair dismissal claim based on asserted statutory rights to receive holiday pay was made subject to a £100 deposit order because it had little reasonable prospect of success; it was not finally determined. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Rule 39 ETs (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regs 2013
- no reasonable prospect of success
- little reasonable prospect of success
- justice and equity
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.
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.