Case 3300607/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Williams v Oxfordshire Mind — 2025
- Case reference
- 3300607/2025
- Decision date
- 5 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shastri-Hurst Representation
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S Williams
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Reading on 13 November 2025, before Employment Judge Shastri-Hurst, the claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Mr Z Ali, solicitor. This short judgment disposed of three complaints. The complaints of holiday pay and notice pay were dismissed following withdrawal by the claimant.
The complaint of failure to make reasonable adjustments, pleaded on the grounds of associative disability, was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The judgment states that the claimant's remaining claims will proceed to a further preliminary hearing on 24 March 2026. No remedy, monetary award, legal test, or lay panel members are recorded in the text.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The judgment records the complaint of holiday pay and says it was dismissed following a withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment records the complaint of notice pay and says it was dismissed following a withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The complaint of failure to make reasonable adjustments, pleaded on the grounds of associative disability, was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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.