Case 3201500/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss L Lansana v London Borough of Newham — 2025
- Case reference
- 3201500/2024
- Decision date
- 23 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge C Lewis Members
- Venue
- East London
- Panel members
- Ms A Berry, Mr R Blanco
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss L Lansana
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal dismissed the complaint of unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability, finding it was not well-founded. It also dismissed the complaints of harassment related to disability and victimisation.
The Tribunal upheld part of the reasonable adjustments claim. It found that from April 2024 onwards the Respondent failed to provide breaks from customer calls by allocating administrative duties, failed to limit the Claimant to 50 calls per day, failed to redeploy her to an administrative role without a high volume of calls, and refused to let her take breaks at times that would provide the most relief for her symptoms. The remaining reasonable adjustments complaints were dismissed.
The Tribunal made recommendations about identifying suitable redeployment roles, considering placement without competitive interview subject to other redeployees' suitability, and carrying out a training needs assessment. It awarded £23,000 for injury to feelings plus £2,641.53 interest.
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 | Complaint described as unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability; dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments complaints were upheld in part and dismissed in part. The upheld complaints concerned breaks from customer calls, limiting calls to 50 per day, redeployment to an administrative role, and timing of breaks. | Upheld | Disability | £23,000 |
| Harassment | Complaint of harassment related to disability dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | Complaint of victimisation dismissed as not well-founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £25,642
- across all upheld claims
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.