Case 3304255/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Bibi v B&Q Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 3304255/2018
- Decision date
- 21 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brown
- Venue
- Cambridge
- Panel members
- Ms D Clarke, Mr R Eyre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Bibi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dismissed the claimant's complaint of unfair dismissal, finding it was not well-founded.
The tribunal also dismissed two disability discrimination complaints: unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability, and discrimination by failing to comply with a duty to make reasonable adjustments. The judgment records that both complaints were not well-founded.
Reasons were given orally on 21 November 2019. The written record states that no written reasons would be provided unless a party requested them within 14 days of the sending of the written record of the decision.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the complaint of unfair dismissal was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment describes this as a complaint of unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability, and states it was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment describes this as a complaint of discrimination by failing to comply with a duty to make reasonable adjustments, and states it was not well-founded and was 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.