Case 3312195/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 3312195/2023
- Decision date
- 15 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Warren Members
- Venue
- Norwich
- Panel members
- Ms J Costley, Mr B Lynch
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed as an Operational Support Officer at HMP Bure and brought claims for disability discrimination and notice pay. The respondent accepted that she was disabled by reason of Autism, Dyspraxia, Depression and Anxiety. The tribunal recorded that her absence was caused by her Autism, anxiety and depression, and that the FARM process and dismissal were unfavourable treatment arising from disability.
The tribunal found that the respondent relied on legitimate aims of maintaining acceptable staffing and ensuring the safety of prison staff, prisoners and the wider public. On the information available to the decision maker at the time, including the absence of the 14 August 2023 Occupational Health report, the tribunal found that holding the FARM and dismissing the claimant were proportionate means of achieving those aims, so the disability discrimination claim failed.
For the notice pay claim, the tribunal found that the Employment Rights Act notice provisions did not apply to Crown employees and that the claim had to be founded on contract. Although the contract provided for five weeks' pay in lieu of notice, the tribunal found that the claimant would have continued to be absent due to ill health during the notice period and would not have received pay, so the breach of contract claim also failed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Claim under s.15 Equality Act 2010 for discrimination arising from disability. The tribunal found the FARM process and dismissal were proportionate means of achieving legitimate aims. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract claim for wrongful dismissal and notice pay. The tribunal found the claimant was not entitled to notice pay because she would have remained absent due to ill health and would not have received pay during the notice period. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.15 Equality Act 2010
- proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim
- rule 37 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure
- Blockbuster Entertainment Ltd v James
- Chambers-Mills v Allied Bakeries
- overriding objective
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.