Ms K Hamad-Okunnu v London Borough of Waltham Forest — 2018

The claimant was employed in the respondent's parking appeals service and was accepted for the proceedings as disabled by chronic fatigue syndrome. She did not bring a dismissal complaint, a reasonable adjustments claim, or a claim under s.15 Equality Act 2010. Her complaints concerned alleged disability discrimination over work allocation, telephone duties, a leave request, comments by colleagues or managers, handling of grievance materials, and events around the Fairness at Work process.

On direct disability discrimination, the tribunal found that the evidence did not establish ill-intentioned or partial allocation of work by Emma Fall, disproportionate telephone allocation, or less favourable treatment in the leave request. It also found that Ms Fall did not know the claimant had chronic fatigue syndrome during the relevant allocation period and that the claimant had not advanced a prima facie case that treatment was because of disability.

On harassment, the tribunal found the main allegations about difficult work, telephone lines and leave did not meet the statutory test. It rejected or did not uphold the individual allegations concerning comments by Cheryl Power, Zoe Fitzgerald, Alec House, Emma Fall, and others, finding variously that the comments were not made, were not pursued, were innocuous, or were not related to the claimant's chronic fatigue syndrome.

On victimisation, the tribunal found the 7 December 2015 grievance was not a protected act because it did not directly or inferentially identify a protected characteristic or allege a contravention of the Equality Act 2010. It also held that, even if that conclusion were wrong, the alleged detriments would fail on the facts. The tribunal added that many complaints were out of time under s.123 Equality Act 2010 and that it would not have been just and equitable to extend time.