Case 2408565/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms B. O’Toole v The Wings CE Trust PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2021
- Case reference
- 2408565/2020
- Decision date
- 2 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Algazy QC
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms B. O’Toole
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was an open preliminary hearing to decide whether Ms B. O’Toole had a qualifying disability, described as depression and anxiety, at three material times: February 2019, 13 November 2019, and 28 January 2020. The tribunal heard from the claimant and considered her medical records and occupational health evidence; no expert medical evidence was obtained. The issue of the respondent’s knowledge was listed for consideration but depended on a disability finding.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary issue only. The tribunal found that the claimant was not disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010 in February 2019, on 13 November 2019, or on 28 January 2020; the respondent's knowledge issue therefore did not arise. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
12 references- s.6(1) Equality Act 2010
- Schedule 1 paragraph 5 Equality Act 2010
- Goodwin v Patent Office
- J v DLA Piper UK LLP
- Royal Bank of Scotland v Morris
- Veitch v Red Sky Group Limited
- Abadeh v British Telecommunications PLC
- Igweike v TSB Bank PLC
- Elliott v Dorset County Council
- SCA Packaging v Boyle
- All Answers Ltd v W and R
- Gallop v Newport City Council
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.