Case 6004531/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs. S. Koleva v Queen Anne Street Medical Centre Ltd. and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 6004531/2024
- Decision date
- 19 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tinnion Appearances
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mrs. S. Koleva
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dismissed the claimant's direct disability discrimination claim under s.13 of the Equality Act 2010 and her harassment related to disability claim under s.26 of the Equality Act 2010, finding that each was not well founded.
The tribunal also dismissed the claimant's wages claim under s.13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 against the first respondent and her breach of contract claim seeking notice pay against the first respondent. The judgment records that reasons were given orally and does not include a written explanation of the factual findings or any remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states the direct disability discrimination claim under s.13 Equality Act 2010 was not well founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The judgment states the harassment related to disability claim under s.26 Equality Act 2010 was not well founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment describes this as a wages claim under s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996 against the first respondent and dismisses it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment describes this as a breach of contract claim seeking notice pay against the first respondent and dismisses it. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.