Case 2403367/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S T Ungi v Medimmune UK Limited HELD AT: Manchester — 2026
- Case reference
- 2403367/2024
- Decision date
- 15 January 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S T Ungi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal dismissed the claimant's claim of direct discrimination on grounds of disability contrary to Section 13 of the Equality Act 2010. It also dismissed the claimant's claims of failing to make reasonable adjustments contrary to Sections 20 and 21 of the Equality Act 2010.
The Tribunal dismissed the claimant's claims of harassment contrary to Section 26 of the Equality Act 2010. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the written record states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within the specified time.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Direct discrimination on grounds of disability contrary to Section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 was dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claims of failing to make reasonable adjustments contrary to Sections 20 and 21 of the Equality Act 2010 were dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Claims of harassment contrary to Section 26 of the Equality Act 2010 were dismissed. The written record does not state the protected characteristic for this claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Section 13 of the Equality Act 2010
- Sections 20 and 21 of the Equality Act 2010
- Section 26 of the 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.