Case 3333570/2018 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr Alan Williams (Solicitor) — 2018
- Case reference
- 3333570/2018
- Decision date
- 25 June 2018
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Alliott
- Venue
- Watford
- Panel members
- Ms Angela Brosnan, Mr Ian Bone
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed as a regional skills manager from 3 January 2018 and was dismissed on 2 July 2018 at the end of probation. Her claim form alleged disability discrimination by failure to make reasonable adjustments and also raised a Working Time Regulations issue, but the tribunal held there was no pleaded or evidential claim before it for a failure to allow rest breaks under those Regulations.
The tribunal accepted, following the respondent's concession, that the claimant was disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010. The relevant PCPs were the requirements to drive and to attend meetings with learners, her manager, clients, team members and senior management. The tribunal also recorded that the claimant's knee injury followed an accident on 15 January 2018 and that the respondent made a series of enquiries about her recovery, allowed her to work from home, and provided assistance with Skype/Webex arrangements.
Although the tribunal accepted that the driving and meeting requirements could place the claimant at a substantial disadvantage because they caused pain, it found that the respondent did not know and could not reasonably have been expected to know that the claimant was disabled and likely to be placed at that disadvantage. The claimant was found to have presented as optimistic about recovery, to have reported steady progress, and to have said in March 2018 that the prognosis was for full healing by the end of April. The tribunal considered the respondent's enquiries reasonable in light of the information available and noted that a torn meniscus does not automatically mean disability should be assumed.
Applying paragraph 20(1) of Schedule 8 to the Equality Act 2010 and the knowledge analysis referred to in Secretary of State for Work & Pensions v Alam, the tribunal concluded that the duty to make reasonable adjustments did not arise on the facts known to the respondent. The claim was therefore dismissed, and no remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments. The tribunal accepted the claimant was disabled, but held the respondent did not know and could not reasonably have been expected to know of the disability or the alleged substantial disadvantage. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- paragraph 20(1) of Schedule 8 Equality Act 2010
- Secretary of State for Work & Pensions v Alam [2010] ICR 665
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.