O Suddaby v Sainsburys Supermarkets Ltd Heard: Leeds by CVP Video link — 2024

The claimant was employed by Sainsburys Supermarkets Ltd on a fixed-term contract from 24 September 2021 to 8 January 2022. The respondent did not dispute that the claimant was disabled for Equality Act purposes at the material times. The tribunal first dealt with limitation under section 123 Equality Act 2010 and found there was no continuing act: the incidents involved different people at different times and in different circumstances. It also refused a just and equitable extension, noting that the claimant knew about tribunal time limits, had used ACAS early conciliation, had taken advice, and that delay prejudiced the respondent because Connor Howland was no longer available to give evidence.

On harassment, the tribunal found that the 10 September 2021 interview question about how autism affected the claimant was not unwanted conduct because the claimant had already disclosed autism in the interview. The claimant succeeded in the recruitment process, and there was no finding that the question created a hostile or offensive environment. The tribunal also found that the December 2021 door-greeting exchange did not amount to harassment: the claimant had been asked to do the duty as a favour, not instructed by management, and the remark "you just stand there" was not related to disability and was trivial in the circumstances.

On the August 2022 permanent vacancy application, the tribunal found that the respondent's recruitment team had made an error and that Richard Oldham passed on mistaken information when he investigated the matter. There was no evidence from which disability discrimination could be inferred, and the direct discrimination allegation failed. The reasonable adjustments complaint about door-greeting duties also failed because the claim was out of time, no relevant management practice or instruction was established, and time was not extended. The victimisation allegation likewise failed because the tribunal found no protected-act causation. The tribunal also rejected the later complaint-handling allegations against Jacinta Buthelloe and Rachana Pradhan, finding that they were not involved in the period alleged and that their conduct was not harassment related to disability. All disability discrimination claims were dismissed.