Case 3206632/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Mallon v KPMG LLP Heard: By Cloud Video Platform (Midlands West) — 2023
- Case reference
- 3206632/2021
- Decision date
- 20 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Faulkner
- Panel members
- Mrs R Pelter, Mrs J Keene
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Mallon
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr C Mallon's only recorded complaint was that KPMG LLP failed to make reasonable adjustments by not providing him in advance with a list of the technical questions he would be asked at an interview on 8 September 2021. The tribunal held that the Respondent did not contravene section 39 of the Equality Act 2010 in relation to that request.
On that basis, the tribunal dismissed the complaint of failure to make reasonable adjustments. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons will be provided unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The claim concerned the Respondent's failure to make reasonable adjustments by not providing, before an interview on 8 September 2021, a list of the technical questions the Claimant would be asked. The tribunal found there was no contravention of section 39 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 39 Equality Act 2010
- duty to make reasonable adjustments
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.