Case 2500804/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms K Levy-Yeboah v Govia Thameslink Railway Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2500804/2020
- Decision date
- 3 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill Representation
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms K Levy-Yeboah
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found that the Claimant met the definition of a disabled person under section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 at all relevant times, including when she applied for the job, when the offer was made, and when the offer was withdrawn.
The Tribunal struck out the complaints alleging that the Respondent had PCPs of no lone working, no working near platform edge, no working at heights, and no late evening shifts, and that those PCPs required reasonable adjustments. The reason given was that the Claimant had no reasonable prospects of demonstrating that the Respondent had any of those PCPs.
The judgment records that the strike-out did not affect the other complaints in the claim, which were to be addressed through separate case management orders. The Respondent's other strike-out applications were refused.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The struck-out complaints were the reasonable-adjustment allegations based on alleged PCPs of no lone working, no working near platform edge, no working at heights, and no late evening shifts. The judgment states that other complaints in the claim were unaffected and subject to separate case management orders. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 6 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.