Miss Elena Veysey v Horizon Care South West Limited — 2025

The Claimant worked for Horizon Care South West Limited from 26 June 2023 to 26 September 2023 as a health care assistant. The tribunal found that she had a long-term thyroid condition and was disabled by reason of that condition at the material time. It also found that she had post herpatic neuralgia after the August 2023 fire-related illness, but that PHN was not a disability at the relevant time because it had not lasted for 12 months and was not shown to be likely to last that long. The tribunal rejected the Claimant's evidence that she had told the Respondent about her thyroid condition on the occasions she identified, and found that the Respondent instead knew about smoke inhalation, shingles, nerve damage and PHN.

On the section 15 claim, the tribunal found that the 25 September 2023 Heavitree shift was requested by the Claimant and had been discussed at the return-to-work meeting as a shorter shift with fewer clients. It accepted that the Respondent reduced the shift from nine clients to seven and included a 30-minute break. The greater walking on the day arose because of same-day cancellations and an emergency, which were not part of the original plan. The tribunal therefore did not find that the shift amounted to unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of the Claimant's disability. It also found that the Respondent understood the Claimant's 3 October 2023 email as indicating that she did not wish to attend the grievance meeting and wanted the matter dealt with in writing.

The reasonable adjustments claim failed. The tribunal accepted that the PCPs identified were walking shifts and grievance meetings in person, and it noted that a grievance meeting held by video or postponed could have avoided the disadvantage. However, it found that the Claimant had indicated she wanted the grievance to proceed in her absence, had not asked for a remote or postponed meeting, and that the Respondent did not know and could not reasonably have known of the thyroid disability or its long-term effect. It also found that the return-to-work adjustments had been considered and agreed in light of the health issues the Claimant had disclosed.

The breach of contract claim succeeded. The Respondent accepted that the advertised welcome bonus of £500 was an implied term of the contract, and the tribunal ordered payment of £500 to the Claimant. No separate monetary award was made on the discrimination claims.