Case 6001816/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In Person v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 6001816/2023
- Decision date
- 13 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Smail
- Venue
- Exeter
- Panel members
- Mr K. Sleeth, Ms R. Clarke
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In Person
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat in Exeter before Employment Judge Smail with lay members Mr K. Sleeth and Ms R. Clarke. The Claimant, Ms Caroline Pile, brought disability discrimination claims against the University of Exeter. The judgment records two discrete claims: discrimination arising from disability, and failure to make reasonable adjustments.
The claim of discrimination arising from disability failed by a majority decision. The claim of failure to make reasonable adjustments failed by unanimous decision. The judgment states that, as a result, the Claimant’s claims were dismissed. The extracted text does not set out the tribunal’s detailed reasons, although it notes that full oral reasons were given at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Claim for discrimination arising from disability failed by majority decision. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Other | Claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments failed by unanimous decision. | 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.