Case 4106632/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms. S. Fyffe v Mr. Lawson, Solicitor The Scottish Ministers — 2025
- Case reference
- 4106632/2024
- Decision date
- 15 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tinnion
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms. S. Fyffe
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the final hearing in Dundee, held in person from 10 to 14 November 2025 before Employment Judge Tinnion, Ms. S. Fyffe brought claims against the Scottish Ministers for discrimination arising from disability under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 and for failure to make reasonable adjustments under sections 20 to 21 of the same Act.
The tribunal dismissed both claims. The judgment records only the dispositive findings and does not set out the underlying reasoning in the extracted text supplied here, beyond noting that reasons for the decisions were given orally at the final hearing.
No monetary remedy was awarded in the judgment. The decision also states that written reasons may be requested within two weeks of receipt of the judgment, failing which written reasons would only be provided if requested by the Employment Appeal Tribunal or a competent court.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Claim under s.15 Equality Act 2010 (discrimination arising from disability). | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim under ss.20-21 Equality Act 2010 (failure to make reasonable adjustments). | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.