Case 2602539/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs K Barry v Derbyshire Community Health Services NHS Foundation Trust — 2020
- Case reference
- 2602539/2018
- Decision date
- 18 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Victoria Butler
- Venue
- Nottingham
- Panel members
- Mrs C Hatcliff, Mrs L Scott
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs K Barry
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at Nottingham on 2 to 4 March 2020 before Employment Judge Victoria Butler with Mrs C Hatcliff and Mrs L Scott, unanimously dismissed all of the Claimant's claims. The claim pleaded as constructive unfair dismissal pursuant to s.95 Employment Rights Act 1996 was found not well-founded and dismissed.
The tribunal also dismissed the Claimant's Equality Act 2010 claims. The claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments under sections 20 and 21 was not well-founded, and the claim for direct disability discrimination under section 13 was also not well-founded.
The written record states that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing, so no written reasons are provided in the document beyond the formal outcomes recorded above.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Claim pleaded as constructive unfair dismissal pursuant to s.95 Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments under sections 20 and 21 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim for direct disability discrimination under section 13 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.95 Employment Rights Act 1996
- sections 20 and 21 Equality Act 2010
- section 13 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.