Case 3313367/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Alecho v Oasis Community Learning — 2024
- Case reference
- 3313367/2022
- Decision date
- 16 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill
- Venue
- Watford
- Panel members
- Mr Bean, Ms Hancock
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms J Alecho
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat at Watford on 10 to 13 September 2024 before Employment Judge Quill, with Mr Bean and Ms Hancock as lay members. The claimant, Ms J Alecho, brought complaints against Oasis Community Learning alleging disability discrimination, including a section 15 Equality Act 2010 complaint and a failure to make reasonable adjustments complaint, together with a complaint of direct race discrimination.
The tribunal dismissed all three complaints. The written judgment does not set out the tribunal's detailed factual reasoning, but the operative findings are that the section 15 disability discrimination complaint failed, the reasonable adjustments complaint failed, and the direct race discrimination complaint failed. No monetary remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Complaint under section 15 Equality Act 2010 dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Complaint alleging failure to make reasonable adjustments dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination complaint dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.