Mr J Guiltenane, husband For the v Respondent — 2023

The claimant, a Finance Officer with 25 years' service, brought claims including failure to make reasonable adjustments, unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal. Earlier direct disability discrimination and harassment claims related to disability were withdrawn by her representative after the tribunal's ruling on the admissibility of without prejudice and pre-termination material, and the judgment records those claims as dismissed upon withdrawal.

On disability, the tribunal was not satisfied that the claimant had proved she had a disability within section 6 Equality Act 2010 at the material time. It noted the absence of a disability impact statement and supporting medical evidence, and found no evidence of substantial long-term adverse effect on day-to-day activities. The tribunal also found the respondent did not know, and could not reasonably have been expected to know, that the claimant was disabled.

The reasonable adjustments claim failed. The tribunal identified the alleged PCP as a requirement to attend investigation and disciplinary meetings in person, but found that the respondent did not in fact apply that PCP. The claimant had herself suggested Skype, Zoom, telephone or written responses at different stages, and the respondent offered remote meeting options, advance papers, accompaniment and other support. In any event, the tribunal found no failure to take a reasonable step.

The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed. The tribunal accepted that the reason for dismissal was conduct linked to the claimant's performance and behaviour as Finance Officer. It found that Ms Hamilton carried out a reasonable investigation, that the claimant was repeatedly invited to meetings but did not engage with them, and that the governors' panel independently concluded that allegations 1, 2 and 4 amounted to gross misconduct and allegation 3 to misconduct. Taking into account length of service and a clean disciplinary record, the panel concluded that summary dismissal without notice was within the range of reasonable responses. The wrongful dismissal claim also failed because the tribunal found the claimant's conduct justified dismissal without notice or pay in lieu, and the provisional remedy hearing was vacated so no award was made.