Case 6007521/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Tynan v Metropolitan Police Service — 2025
- Case reference
- 6007521/2024
- Decision date
- 22 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Joyce Representation
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S Tynan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought a claim of discrimination arising from disability. The preliminary hearing was listed to decide whether she was disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010 during the relevant period, agreed as 1 January 2024 to 31 December 2024. The respondent had conceded disability by reason of a back injury or herniated disk, but did not concede disability by reason of anxiety or PTSD.
The tribunal found that the claimant had experienced PTSD and anxiety following her husband's death in 2019, but that from mid-2021 to the end of 2023 she was not experiencing substantial adverse effects on normal day-to-day activities due to PTSD or anxiety. It found that from February 2024 onwards she was experiencing anxiety with substantial adverse effects, following a combination of work-related and family health events.
The tribunal concluded that the claimant was disabled due to anxiety, but not PTSD, from January 2024 onwards. The claimant succeeded on the preliminary issue of disability, and her claims could proceed to final hearing on the basis of disability due to both her back condition and anxiety.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment determined only the preliminary issue of whether the claimant was disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010. The disability discrimination claim was not finally adjudicated and was to proceed to final hearing. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Equality Act 2010
- 2010 Act, sch1, para 2(1)(b)
- sch1, para 2(2)
- deduced effect principle
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.