Case 6003895/2024 · Employment Tribunal
in person (assisted by Ms E Grimes, partner) For the v Respondent — 2026
- Case reference
- 6003895/2024
- Decision date
- 27 January 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kenward
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
1 namedClaimant
in person (assisted by Ms E Grimes, partner) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found that specified complaints of discrimination arising from disability were well-founded. These concerned the Respondent being evasive and misleading over whether the Claimant was a disabled person for Equality Act 2010 purposes, applying a Bradford factor score of 250 on 16 January 2024 in respect of absences that included disability-related absences, and threatening a formal disciplinary process on that basis.
The Tribunal also upheld a harassment complaint related to disability concerning support, responses to queries, and taking the Claimant's disability into account, and upheld an indirect disability discrimination complaint about threatening formal disciplinary proceedings based on the Bradford factor score. The remaining complaints of discrimination arising from disability, harassment related to disability, and indirect disability discrimination were dismissed, as were the complaints of direct disability discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments.
The written judgment records only the outcomes because reasons were given orally. It does not set out any remedy award or monetary breakdown.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Complaints of discrimination arising from disability succeeded in respect of being evasive and misleading over whether the Claimant was disabled for Equality Act 2010 purposes, applying a Bradford factor score of 250 on 16 January 2024 including disability-related absences, and threatening a formal disciplinary process on that basis. Other complaints of discrimination arising from disability were dismissed. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Harassment | A complaint of harassment related to disability succeeded in relation to being purposely unsupportive of the Claimant's need for extra support, not fully answering queries and/or not taking the Claimant's disability into account by being evasive and misleading over disability status. Other harassment complaints were dismissed. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | A complaint of indirect disability discrimination succeeded in relation to applying a practice on 16 January 2024 of threatening formal disciplinary proceedings based on a Bradford factor score of 250. Other indirect disability discrimination complaints were dismissed. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The complaints of direct disability discrimination were dismissed. | 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.