Case 2413408/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Parole v Leila’s Fine Foods Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2413408/2019
- Decision date
- 15 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McDonald
- Panel members
- Mrs S A Humphreys, Dr B Tirohl
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Parole
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant worked for Leila's Fine Foods Ltd from November 2009 and was absent after a work injury in May 2015. The respondent accepted that she was disabled during the relevant period. At the hearing, the claimant withdrew the complaint of failure to make reasonable adjustments under ss.20 and 21 Equality Act 2010 and one disability-related harassment allegation concerning an email checking her bank details; those complaints were dismissed on withdrawal.
The tribunal found that the respondent's HR handling of the claimant's long-term sickness absence was slow and sometimes disjointed, but that the meetings in December 2016, June 2017 and June 2019 were directed at understanding her prognosis, obtaining medical information and considering return-to-work options. It accepted that the respondent told her that termination of employment was a possibility, but held that those discussions, the request for GP consent, the June 2018 wrong-address letter, the P45 and the grievance correspondence were not shown to be a repudiatory breach of contract or conduct undermining trust and confidence.
Because there was no constructive dismissal, the unfair dismissal complaint failed. The s.15 disability discrimination claim also failed because the alleged unfavourable treatment was the claimed dismissal; the tribunal said that, in any event, the respondent was pursuing legitimate aims of maintaining a workforce able to meet operational requirements and managing sickness absence. The remaining harassment allegations, including the later banking email, were dismissed because the tribunal found they were not unwanted conduct with a harassing purpose or effect. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
6 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Complaint under ss.20 and 21 Equality Act 2010 that the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments. The claimant withdrew it in her August 2020 correspondence and Schedule of Loss, and it was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Specific disability-related harassment allegation concerning an email checking the claimant's bank details. The claimant withdrew the allegation during the hearing and it was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Constructive dismissal | The tribunal held that the respondent's conduct, viewed individually and cumulatively, was not a repudiatory breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, so the claimant was not constructively dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Because the tribunal found there was no constructive dismissal and therefore no dismissal at all, the unfair dismissal complaint failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Section 15 claim based on long-term sickness absence as something arising in consequence of disability. The tribunal found no dismissal and, in any event, said the respondent's aim of maintaining an effective workforce and managing sickness absence was legitimate. |
Legal tests applied
13 references- s.94 ERA 1996
- s.98(4) ERA 1996
- Polkey v A E Dayton Services Ltd
- Western Excavating (ECC) Ltd v Sharp
- Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA
- Omilaju v Waltham Forest LBC
- Kaur v Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
- s.15 Equality Act 2010
- Basildon and Thurrock NHS Foundation Trust v Weerasinghe
- s.26 Equality Act 2010
- Grant v HM Land Registry & Anor
- s.136 Equality Act 2010
- EHRC Code of Practice on Employment
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.