Case 3200687/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Jituboh v London Borough of Tower Hamlets — 2023
- Case reference
- 3200687/2020
- Decision date
- 18 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge E Gordon-Walker Members
- Panel members
- Mr J Hutchings, Dr J Ukemenam
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms J Jituboh
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at East London Hearing Centre before Employment Judge E Gordon-Walker with members Mr J Hutchings and Dr J Ukemenam, considered claims by Ms J Jituboh against London Borough of Tower Hamlets for reasonable adjustments, harassment related to disability, and direct disability discrimination. The judgment records that the reasonable adjustments complaint under section 21 Equality Act 2010 was well founded. The tribunal also found that, insofar as any part of that complaint had been presented outside the primary time limit, it was within a period that was just and equitable under section 123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010.
On harassment related to disability, the tribunal held that allegation D was outside its jurisdiction because the complaint had not been presented in time under section 123(1) Equality Act 2010. The remaining harassment allegations were considered on their merits and were found not well founded, so they were dismissed.
The claim of direct disability discrimination under section 13 Equality Act 2010 was also found not well founded and dismissed. The extract provided contains liability findings only and does not record any monetary award or other remedy.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Reasonable adjustments complaint under section 21 Equality Act 2010 was well founded. The tribunal found the complaint was brought within the time limit, and insofar as any part was outside time it was within the just and equitable extension under section 123(1)(b). | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Allegation D of harassment related to disability was outside jurisdiction because the complaint was not brought within the time limit under section 123(1) Equality Act 2010. | Other | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The other harassment-related-to-disability complaints were found not well founded and were dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination under section 13 Equality Act 2010 was found not well founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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.