Case 3300480/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Brown, Counsel For the v Mr J Gilbert, Employment Law Consultant — 2018
- Case reference
- 3300480/2019
- Decision date
- 30 November 2018
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Postle Members
- Venue
- Norwich Heard
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Brown, Counsel For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal accepted that the claimant was disabled, with the respondents having the requisite knowledge, and that her conditions included arthritis, carpal tunnel syndrome and ankylosing spondylitis. It found, however, that there was no evidence of the alleged March or April 2018 request to work from home, and that the first documented request for flexible working was made on 11 June 2018. That request was refused on 22 June 2018 because home working was not considered to be in the best interests of the company, but the tribunal noted that the claimant was invited to identify any other adjustments that might help. The tribunal also found that the claimant made a formal reasonable adjustments request on 31 August 2018, after which the respondents arranged a welfare meeting and, by letter of 30 November 2018, offered the adjustments requested, including temporary home working, modified keyboard and mouse equipment, a monitor stand or arm stand, and relocation to the ground floor.
Claims and outcomes
8 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments under sections 20 and 21 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Direct discrimination under section 13 Equality Act 2010, including the complaints about the 26 July 2018 work error incident, the 24 August 2018 performance email, the welfare meeting, and the home-working comparator points. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability under section 15 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Harassment under section 26 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation under section 27 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Constructive dismissal | Constructive unfair dismissal; the allegation was also advanced as discriminatory constructive dismissal, but the tribunal found no fundamental breach and no repudiatory conduct. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Flexible working |
Legal tests applied
15 references- s.13 Equality Act 2010
- s.15 Equality Act 2010
- s.20 Equality Act 2010
- s.21 Equality Act 2010
- s.26 Equality Act 2010
- s.27 Equality Act 2010
- s.136 Equality Act 2010
- s.47C ERA 1996
- s.57A ERA 1996
- s.80F ERA 1996
- s.80G ERA 1996
- s.95(1)(c) ERA 1996
- Western Excavating v Sharp
- Acas Code of Practice on handling requests to work flexibly
- EHRC Statutory Code of Practice on Employment 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.