Case 3301705/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Franklin v Strata Creative Communications Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 3301705/2024
- Decision date
- 9 January 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Andrew Clarke
- Venue
- Cambridge
- Panel members
- Ms Susan Laurence-Doig, Ms Julia Buck
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A Franklin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed for a substantial reason and that the dismissal was fair. The unfair dismissal claim therefore failed and was dismissed.
The tribunal dismissed the disability-related claims, including direct disability discrimination, the claim under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010, failure to make reasonable adjustments, and unlawful harassment relating to disability. The written judgment records the outcomes only and notes that reasons were given orally, with written reasons to be provided only if requested.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claimant was dismissed for a substantial reason, that the dismissal was fair, and that the unfair dismissal claim fails and is dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the claim for direct disability discrimination fails and is dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the claim under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 fails and is dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that there was no failure by the respondent to make reasonable adjustments consequent upon the claimant's disability, and that the reasonable adjustments claim fails and is dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The judgment states that the claim for unlawful harassment relating to disability fails and is dismissed. | 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.