Case 3201548/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms O. Kayongo v London Underground Limited and 2 others — 2025
- Case reference
- 3201548/2024
- Decision date
- 24 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Massarella Members
- Panel members
- Ms T. Jansen, Mrs A. Smith
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Ms O. Kayongo
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal dismissed the indirect disability discrimination claim on withdrawal. It also dismissed the automatically unfair dismissal claim against the First Respondent, the failure to make reasonable adjustments claim, and the victimisation claim as not well-founded.
The ordinary unfair dismissal claim against the First Respondent succeeded because the Tribunal found that the First Respondent failed to establish the medical position before moving to dismissal. The disability-arising discrimination claim also succeeded in relation to the dismissal against the First and Second Respondents and in relation to rejection of the appeal against the First and Third Respondents.
The judgment records that a remedy hearing will determine the compensation to which the Claimant is entitled, so no award or breakdown is stated in this decision.
Claims and outcomes
6 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Victimisation | The victimisation claim was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The claim of indirect disability discrimination was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The automatically unfair dismissal claim against the First Respondent was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The ordinary unfair dismissal claim against the First Respondent succeeded. | Upheld | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The disability-arising discrimination claim succeeded against the First and Second Respondents in relation to dismissal and against the First and Third Respondents in relation to rejection of the appeal. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The failure to make reasonable adjustments claim was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed |
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.