Case 3314946/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr David Palmer v Anova London Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 3314946/2020
- Decision date
- 27 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Margo
- Panel members
- Mrs G Binks, Mr W Dykes
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr David Palmer
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed by Anova London Limited as a Performance Marketing Manager from 14 August 2018 until his resignation on 17 August 2020. He brought claims including constructive unfair dismissal, automatically unfair dismissal under s.103A ERA 1996, whistleblowing detriments, direct disability discrimination, victimisation and harassment. The victimisation and harassment claims were withdrawn and dismissed upon withdrawal.
The tribunal dismissed the constructive unfair dismissal, automatically unfair dismissal and whistleblowing detriment claims. It also dismissed most of the direct disability discrimination allegations, finding that many alleged acts did not occur as characterised or were not shown to be because of disability.
The tribunal found that the claimant was disabled by depression/anxiety at the relevant times. The direct disability discrimination claim succeeded only in relation to comments made by Mr Azouri to Ms Doctorsky in June 2020, where the tribunal found that the comments related to the claimant's mental health condition and amounted to less favourable treatment. Time was extended on just and equitable grounds for that claim.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Victimisation | The judgment records that any victimisation claim was withdrawn and dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Harassment | The judgment records that harassment claims were withdrawn and dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment describes this as constructive unfair dismissal and dismisses it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment dismisses the automatically unfair dismissal claim under s.103A ERA 1996 and the whistleblowing detriment claims. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination succeeded only in relation to comments made by Mr Azouri to Ms Doctorsky in June 2020; the other direct disability discrimination allegations were dismissed. | Upheld | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- s.103A ERA 1996
- s.47B ERA 1996
- direct disability discrimination
- just and equitable extension of time
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.