Case 3310150/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs R Beeharry v Boots Management Services Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 3310150/2021
- Decision date
- 20 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Farrelly
- Panel members
- Ms Knapton, Ms Smithe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs R Beeharry
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dismissed the claimant's claim of unfair dismissal. The written judgment records that oral reasons were given at the hearing, and no written reasons are included in the supplied judgment text.
The tribunal also dismissed two Equality Act 2010 claims recorded as failure to make reasonable adjustments, one under section 21 and one under section 15. The judgment ordered the claimant to pay £1,500 to the respondent as a contribution towards costs.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim described as failure to make reasonable adjustments in accordance with section 21 of the Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Judgment text describes this as failure to make reasonable adjustments as required under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010; section 15 is recorded as named in the judgment, but the extracted wording is unclear. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 21 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.