Mrs L Lyddall v The Wooldridge Partnership Limited — 2022

Mrs L Lyddall was employed by The Wooldridge Partnership Limited as Marketing Manager from 30 March 2021, subject to a six-month probationary period, and was dismissed on 2 August 2021. The claimant brought a complaint of disability discrimination, alleging that her dismissal was direct discrimination because of disability. The tribunal found that she was a disabled person within the meaning of section 6 Equality Act 2010.

The tribunal accepted that there were some errors in the claimant's work, but found that concerns about performance were not properly communicated to her as criticism or as a performance issue below the required standard. It found there was no contemporary documentary record of poor performance, no formal performance process, and no clear direct engagement with the claimant about any alleged shortcomings. Mr Constantinou's comments were treated as input and opinion rather than clear performance criticism, and the tribunal considered it reasonable for the claimant to believe she had received positive reinforcement.

The tribunal also attached significance to the evidence that Mr Wooldridge linked the absence of negative feedback to the claimant's disability and medical treatment, and to the timing of events after the claimant had notified the respondent of further treatment and time off work. It concluded that the claimant had proved facts from which discrimination could be inferred, and that the respondent had not shown the dismissal was free from discrimination.

The tribunal held that the reason for dismissal was in part the claimant's disability, and that the respondent had not proved that performance alone explained the dismissal. The complaint of disability discrimination therefore succeeded. A separate remedy hearing was listed for 28 March 2023, so no award was determined in this judgment.