Case 2403444/2022 · Employment Tribunal
(1) Ms N Ridley-Laing (2) Miss L Mason v The Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police — 2025
- Case reference
- 2403444/2022
- Decision date
- 28 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Butler
- Venue
- Manchester
- Panel members
- Mrs PJ Byrne, Mr P Dodd
Parties
2 namedClaimant
(1) Ms N Ridley-Laing (2) Miss L Mason
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal unanimously dismissed Ms Ridley-Laing's and Miss Mason's complaints of direct disability discrimination, harassment related to disability, failure to make reasonable adjustments, discrimination arising from disability and victimisation.
The tribunal also dismissed Miss Mason's claim of unfair (constructive) dismissal. The written judgment records that all claims brought by the claimants across the listed case numbers failed and were dismissed, but it does not include written reasons because reasons were given orally at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The written judgment states that both claimants' complaints of direct disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, and discrimination arising from disability failed and were dismissed. Written reasons were not included. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The written judgment states that both claimants' complaints of harassment related to disability failed and were dismissed. Written reasons were not included. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | The written judgment states that both claimants' complaints of victimisation failed and were dismissed. Written reasons were not included. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Constructive dismissal | The written judgment describes Miss Mason's claim as unfair (constructive) dismissal and states that it failed and was dismissed. Written reasons were not included. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.