Case 3313127/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms B Noah v British Airways plc — 2025
- Case reference
- 3313127/2023
- Decision date
- 29 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Annand Representation
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms B Noah
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination after being dismissed under the respondent's absence management policy. At an earlier preliminary hearing it was clarified that the disability discrimination complaints were discrimination arising from disability and failure to make reasonable adjustments, with anxiety and depression relied on as disabilities.
The respondent applied to strike out the claims, or alternatively for an unless order, because the claimant had not provided a disability impact statement or disclosure by the ordered deadlines and had not progressed preparation for the final hearing. The tribunal found serious non-compliance and inordinate delay, and found that the claimant had failed actively to progress the claims.
The tribunal refused to strike out the claims at this stage, noting the guidance that strike out should be a last resort and taking account of the claimant's asserted disability and medical evidence without making findings on disability. It granted an unless order requiring the claimant to provide the disability impact statement and disclosure within seven days, failing which the claims would be automatically struck out.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records that the claimant brought an unfair dismissal claim, but this preliminary hearing decided the respondent's strike-out application and unless order application rather than the merits of the claim. | Other | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records claims of discrimination arising from disability and failure to make reasonable adjustments, with anxiety and depression relied on as disabilities, but this preliminary hearing did not decide the merits. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- rule 38(1)(a)-(e)
- Weir Valves and Controls (UK) Ltd v Armitage [2004] ICR 371
- Otehtubi v Friends in St Helier EAT 0094/16
- Evans and anor v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [1993] ICR 151
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.