Ms Pauline Pilawa v Spericle Ltd T/A Properties on the Market — 2024

The tribunal found that Ms Pauline Pilawa was disabled within section 6 Equality Act 2010 at the material time, which it identified as 23 September 2021 to 19 November 2021. It accepted that she had endometriosis, that the condition had a substantial and long-term adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities, and that the Respondent knew or could reasonably have been expected to know about it from the outset of employment and from later emails and fit notes.

On the unfair dismissal claim, the tribunal preferred the Claimant's evidence and found Mr Vaddaram to be unreliable. It held that the disciplinary allegations and documents relied on by the Respondent were fabricated for the purposes of the hearing, that there was no genuine misconduct reason and no genuine capability reason for dismissal, and that the Respondent did not carry out any meaningful investigation, consultation, hearing or appeal process. The dismissal on 5 November 2021 followed the Claimant's return of the return-to-work assessment form by seconds, and the tribunal found that the real reason for dismissal was her request for homeworking as an adjustment, together with the second fit note confirming reduced work and working from home.

The section 15 claim succeeded because the dismissal and the refusal to reconsider it on 8 November 2021 were unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability, namely the Claimant's request for adjustment and the fit notes prompted by her endometriosis-related pain. The tribunal rejected the Respondent's justification case, finding no proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. The reasonable-adjustments claim also succeeded: the tribunal found that the Respondent imposed a PCP requiring office attendance and not offering amended duties or homeworking, that this placed the Claimant at a substantial disadvantage, and that permitting homeworking was a reasonable adjustment given the previous arrangement had worked without complaint.

In remedy, the tribunal awarded a basic award of £499.44, loss of statutory rights of £500.00 and a compensatory award of £6,353.30 for unfair dismissal. It also awarded £15,000 for injury to feelings, £1,042.96 for loss of earnings flowing from the discrimination, a 25% ACAS uplift totalling £5,338.32, and interest of £2,973.32, producing a total award of £31,707.34.