Ms Eleonora Belfiore v Loughborough University — 2023

Ms Belfiore brought claims of constructive unfair dismissal, discrimination arising from disability, indirect disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, harassment and victimisation. The respondent conceded that she was disabled by reason of ADHD, and the tribunal dealt with strike-out and deposit issues on the papers after an earlier hearing. It applied Rules 37 and 39 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, and it did not strike out the discrimination claims on limitation grounds because it could not decide the just and equitable extension issue without full submissions.

On the section 15 discrimination arising from disability allegation, the tribunal held that the pleaded case about Mr Deakin's comments in meetings on 19 July 2021 and 22 September 2021 was not suitable for strike out on the papers. It said it was arguable that asking whether the Claimant was comfortable with colleagues taking extra work, and saying it would not be fair to other colleagues, could amount to unfavourable treatment, and that the question of causation would need to be decided after evidence. The constructive dismissal claim also remained live because it depended on the evidence.

For the PCP and harassment allegations, the tribunal treated PCP 1, about training, and PCP 2, about chaotic and ad hoc workload allocation, as having little reasonable prospect of success and ordered deposits of £150 for each. PCP 3, about increasing workloads year on year, was allowed to proceed without strikeout or deposit. PCP 4, about not allowing companions from outside the University other than trade union representatives, was struck out because it was not a PCP in law on the pleaded case. Harassment allegations A and B were allowed to proceed, while harassment allegations C and D and the victimisation claim were each found to have little reasonable prospect of success and were each subject to a £150 deposit. The total deposit if the Claimant wished to proceed with all of the ordered allegations and arguments was £750.