Case 3310857/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Ninvalle v Hammersmith Medicines Research Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 3310857/2022
- Decision date
- 14 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto Tribunal
- Venue
- Reading
- Panel members
- Mr A Kapur, Mrs F Tankard
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Ninvalle
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr N Ninvalle, was employed by Hammersmith Medicines Research Limited (a clinical trials company) from 29 April 2019 until 31 May 2022, latterly as Account Payables Manager and Zahara Systems Administrator. He brought complaints of unfair dismissal, discrimination arising from disability (s.15 Equality Act 2010) and failure to make reasonable adjustments (ss.20-21 Equality Act 2010). The proceedings had a lengthy procedural history, including amendment applications and a postponed final hearing, with the substantive hearing taking place at Reading over 10-14 March 2025 before Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto sitting with Mr A Kapur and Mrs F Tankard.
On the s.15 discrimination claim, the Tribunal found the evidence did not support the case. The claimant's own stated reason for the conduct relied on (withdrawing students' access to the Zahara system) was to safeguard the integrity of the respondent's financial management system, and was not something arising in consequence of his disability. The Tribunal also accepted that restoring the students' access was a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aim of enabling the students to perform their duties as directed by Mr O'Brien.
On the reasonable adjustments claim, the Tribunal found that the alleged PCP of 'not permitting people to withdraw their resignation' did not exist; on the claimant's own evidence, another colleague had been allowed to withdraw a resignation. All three complaints were accordingly found not well founded and were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Originally pleaded as constructive dismissal; amended on 2 May 2023 (granted 6/7 November 2023) to allege express dismissal. The Tribunal found the complaint not well founded and dismissed it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Section 15 Equality Act 2010 claim of discrimination arising from disability. The Tribunal found the evidence did not support the claim; the claimant's own evidence explained the relevant conduct in a way that did not arise in consequence of his disability, and any unfavourable treatment was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments under sections 20 and 21 Equality Act 2010. The alleged PCP of 'not permitting people to withdraw their resignation' was not made out on the claimant's own evidence (another colleague had been permitted to withdraw a resignation). | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 15 Equality Act 2010
- sections 20 and 21 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.