Miss. A. Chernysh v Metropolitan Housing Trust Limited and Thames Valley Housing Association Limited — 2026

The claimant, a Contract Manager, resigned on 23 August 2023 with employment ending on 20 September 2023. The tribunal accepted that she had Long Covid amounting to a disability, with fatigue as the established symptom, but did not accept the full range or extent of symptoms she alleged, including cognitive impairment or brain fog as pleaded. It found the respondent had actual or constructive knowledge of disability from at least February 2022, but that the claimant had not proved the pleaded substantial disadvantages in the disciplinary and grievance processes.

The constructive dismissal claim was dismissed. The tribunal found that the respondent had reasonable and proper cause to investigate WhatsApp messages sent from the claimant's phone to her direct reports, and that using those messages in the disciplinary process did not breach the claimant's contract, data protection rights, Article 8 or Article 10. It did not accept that the 21 August 2023 data protection email was a final straw causing resignation; it found the claimant had already decided to leave after securing new employment.

The disability discrimination claims were dismissed. The tribunal found that the August 2023 grievances were materially different from the allegations made by Ms Spencer and Mr Bridge, so the direct discrimination comparison failed. The indirect discrimination and reasonable adjustments claims also failed because the pleaded PCPs were not established as pleaded, or did not put the claimant or a relevant group at the pleaded disadvantage. The tribunal found the claimant was able to participate effectively in the meetings she attended, could have requested more time, and was given or offered adjustments including written questions, remote attendance, breaks, postponement of the disciplinary hearing, and the opportunity to provide written evidence.

The harassment and victimisation claims were dismissed. The tribunal found that the grievance appeal and disciplinary arrangements were not shown to be unwanted conduct related to disability with the required statutory effect. For victimisation, although the 1 August 2023 grievance was accepted as a protected act, the tribunal found that the decision to proceed to a disciplinary hearing had been made before that grievance and that the later alleged detriments were not caused by the protected act.

The unlawful deduction from wages claims were dismissed. The £500 bonus was found to be outside the tribunal's jurisdiction because it was brought out of time, and in any event the claimant had not shown a legal entitlement to it. The TOIL claim for 131 hours at £26.93 per hour was dismissed because overtime had not been agreed in advance and there was no contractual right to payment for time spent preparing grievance or disciplinary materials. No remedy was awarded because all claims were dismissed.