Case 2406453/2019 · Employment Tribunal

Ms E Glasby v Edge Hill University — 2022

Case reference: 2406453/2019
Decision date: 11 October 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Warren
Panel members: Mr S Anslow, Mrs A Jarvis

Indexed: 17 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms E Glasby

Respondent

Edge Hill University

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claimant, a full-time wheelchair user who was disabled by reason of lack of mobility and cancer, brought disability discrimination claims against Edge Hill University after her employment ended by dismissal on capability grounds. The tribunal found that three reasonable adjustment issues were out of time and that it would not be just and equitable to extend time.

The tribunal unanimously found a failure to make a reasonable adjustment in relation to access through the Catalyst Building doors in their original design, causing a detriment on one occasion. By majority, with Employment Judge Warren dissenting on the relevant points, the tribunal found that the claim of discrimination arising from disability succeeded and that the dismissal was discriminatory.

The majority also found that the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments by failing to disregard previous periods of disability-related absence when applying the sickness absence policies and by preventing the claimant from purchasing additional annual leave to use for short sickness absences. The judgment provided in the prompt is a liability decision and does not state a remedy award.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Disability discrimination	Discrimination arising from disability succeeded by majority. The tribunal found that the claimant's dismissal was discriminatory and that the respondent failed to disregard previous periods of disability-related sickness absence when applying the sickness absence policy.	Upheld	Disability	—
Disability discrimination	Failure to make reasonable adjustments succeeded in part. The upheld failures were not ensuring access through the Catalyst Building doors in their original design, failing to disregard previous periods of disability-related absence when applying the sickness absence policies, and preventing the claimant from purchasing additional annual leave to use for short sickness absences. Issues 7a, 7b and 7c were out of time and the tribunal had no jurisdiction to adjudicate on them.	Upheld	Disability	—

Legal tests applied

6 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.