Case 3200817/2023 · Employment Tribunal

Ms P Oliver v St Mungos Community Housing Association Ltd and 2 others — 2024

Case reference: 3200817/2023
Decision date: 21 June 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Yale Representation
Venue: East London Hearing Centre

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

4 named

Claimant

Ms P Oliver

Respondents

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal recorded that the claimant's claim of direct discrimination against the third respondent was dismissed. The short judgment does not give reasons for that dismissal or set out any remedy.

The judgment also recorded that the claimant's claims against the first and second respondents shall proceed to a final hearing. No findings on those claims, legal tests, panel members, or monetary awards are stated in the extracted text.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Disability discrimination	The judgment dismisses the claimant's claim of direct discrimination against the third respondent. The gov.uk listing category identifies the discrimination category as Disability Discrimination; the judgment text itself does not set out reasons or further particulars.	Dismissed	Disability	—
Whistleblowing	The judgment states that the claimant's claims against the first and second respondents shall proceed to a final hearing. The gov.uk listing category includes Public Interest Disclosure, but this short judgment does not adjudicate that claim.	Other	—	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.