Case 2500190/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs R McLoughlin v North of England Commissioning Support Unit — 2024
- Case reference
- 2500190/2024
- Decision date
- 10 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge O’Dempsey
- Venue
- Newcastle Upon Tyne
- Panel members
- S Wykes, J Johnson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs R McLoughlin
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent conceded liability for breach of section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 (discrimination arising from disability). The tribunal, sitting as a full panel at Newcastle Upon Tyne on 9 December 2024, made a remedy order against the respondent on that conceded basis.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £5,724.64 by way of lost earnings for the period from 2 January 2024 to 29 April 2024, together with £3,000 as compensation for injury to feelings. Interest was awarded in the sums of £235.26 on the lost earnings and £246.58 on the injury to feelings award.
Reasons were given orally at the hearing; written reasons will not be provided unless requested in accordance with the rules.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Respondent conceded liability for breach of section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 (discrimination arising from disability). Award comprises lost earnings (£5,724.64), injury to feelings (£3,000), and interest (£235.26 on lost earnings; £246.58 on injury to feelings). | Upheld | Disability | £9,206 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,206
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £5,725
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 15 Equality Act 2010
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.