Case 3202167/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Ms F El Bergui v Ria Financial Services Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 3202167/2018
- Decision date
- 16 April 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brook Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms F El Bergui
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the preliminary hearing on 11 February 2019, before Employment Judge Brook, it was common ground that Ms El Bergui did not have sufficient service to pursue an ordinary unfair dismissal claim, and the live claims were sex and disability discrimination. The tribunal considered medical evidence including GP material from Dr Karen Miller and Dr Virdi and the claimant's evidence about hypothyroidism, fatigue, dizziness and associated symptoms.
The tribunal was satisfied that Ms El Bergui was disabled at the relevant times within the meaning of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. It found that her hypothyroidism, with associated epilepsy and benign positional vertigo, amounted to a disability. The judgment records that the claimant described effects on everyday life including extreme fatigue, dizziness and episodes that could progress to vomiting and epilepsy.
The tribunal did not decide the substantive discrimination complaints at that hearing. It identified the issues for a full merits hearing, including alleged failures to make reasonable adjustments to working hours, branch location and days worked, exclusion from the bonus scheme, alleged underpayment of contractual and statutory sick pay, repeated requests for medical information, and allegations around the May 2017 dismissal notice and sex or pregnancy-related treatment. The tribunal also listed issues on time limits, Polkey reduction, contributory fault and mitigation, and directed the case toward a four-day full merits hearing in November 2019.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary issue only. The tribunal held that the claimant was disabled within the meaning of section 6 Equality Act 2010 at the relevant times, so the disability discrimination claims could proceed; no substantive merits or remedy were determined in this judgment. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 6 Equality Act 2010
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.