Case 6006448/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs D Hetherington v Cumberland Council — 2026
- Case reference
- 6006448/2024
- Decision date
- 25 March 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs D Hetherington
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal dismissed the complaint of unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability, the complaint of indirect disability discrimination, and the complaints of failure to make reasonable adjustments for disability. Each was recorded as not well-founded.
The Tribunal also dismissed the complaints of harassment related to disability as not well-founded. The written judgment records that reasons were given orally and that written reasons would only be provided if requested, so no further factual findings are available in the text.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Complaint of unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability was not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Complaint of indirect disability discrimination was not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Complaints of failure to make reasonable adjustments for disability were not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Complaints of harassment related to disability were not well-founded and 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.