Case 3301581/2024 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 3301581/2024
- Decision date
- 27 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tynan Members
- Venue
- Cambridge
- Panel members
- Ms B Handley-Howarth, Ms H Gunnell
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal recorded that the claimant's disability discrimination claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments succeeded in part, limited to the PCP identified in paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the List of Issues. It also recorded that her harassment claim succeeded in respect of Ms Straker's comments on 19 June 2023 that others could perceive her as disorganised or uncommitted.
The Tribunal found that the claimant's s.15 Equality Act 2010 claim succeeded in respect of the respondent's decision on or around 17 July 2023 to initiate a performance improvement plan. It further recorded that the claimant was constructively dismissed, and that her unfair dismissal and direct disability discrimination complaints relating to dismissal were well-founded and succeeded.
The written record states that oral reasons were given at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. No remedy figures or award breakdown are stated in the text provided.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The reasonable adjustments claim under s.20 Equality Act 2010 succeeded in part in respect of the PCP identified in paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the List of Issues. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The harassment claim under s.26(2) Equality Act 2010 succeeded in respect of comments made on 19 June 2023. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The s.15 Equality Act 2010 claim succeeded in respect of the decision on or around 17 July 2023 to initiate a performance improvement plan. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment states that the claimant was constructively dismissed. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The complaint that the claimant was unfairly dismissed contrary to section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was well-founded and succeeded. | Upheld | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The direct disability discrimination complaint relating to dismissal was well-founded and succeeded. | Upheld | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- s.20 Equality Act 2010
- s.26(2) Equality Act 2010
- s.15 Equality Act 2010
- section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
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.