Case 3303692/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss P Lawrence-Jennings v Guildford City Swimming Club — 2022
- Case reference
- 3303692/2020
- Decision date
- 29 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Eeley
- Venue
- Reading
- Panel members
- Mrs A Crosby, Mr D Palmer
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss P Lawrence-Jennings
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Reading Employment Tribunal via CVP on 14 to 16 September 2022 before Employment Judge Eeley, Mrs A Crosby and Mr D Palmer. Miss P Lawrence-Jennings appeared in person, assisted by her mother, and Guildford City Swimming Club was represented by counsel. The judgment records claims for direct disability discrimination under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 and for discrimination because of something arising in consequence of disability under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010.
The tribunal dismissed both sets of disability discrimination claims. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested, so the public text records the outcomes but does not set out the detailed factual or legal reasoning. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination under section 13 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Section 15 discrimination because of something arising in consequence of disability. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 13 Equality Act 2010
- section 15 Equality Act 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.