Case 2409484/2023 · Employment Tribunal
A Connolly v Manchester City Council — 2025
- Case reference
- 2409484/2023
- Decision date
- 26 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Batten
- Panel members
- A Clarke, M Stemp
Parties
2 namedClaimant
A Connolly
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal gave a unanimous liability judgment. It dismissed the complaint of constructive unfair dismissal as not well-founded.
The Tribunal upheld one complaint of disability discrimination under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 concerning a telephone call to the claimant on or about 14 April 2023, extending time on a just and equitable basis. It dismissed all other complaints of disability discrimination and victimisation as not well-founded.
The judgment records that reasons were given orally and that the claim was to proceed to a remedy hearing on 7 April 2026, so no remedy figures were determined in this written record.
Claims and outcomes
4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment states that the complaint of constructive unfair dismissal was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the complaint under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 succeeded in respect of the telephone call to the claimant on or about 14 April 2023, time having been extended on a just and equitable basis. Remedy was reserved for a later hearing. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that all other complaints of disability discrimination were not well-founded and were dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | The judgment states that all complaints of victimisation were not well-founded and were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 15 of the Equality Act 2010
- just and equitable basis
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.