Case 6011524/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Fardousi v John Lewis plc — 2025
- Case reference
- 6011524/2024
- Decision date
- 29 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Keogh
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Fardousi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal had made an Unless Order requiring the claimant to confirm whether she wished to pursue disability discrimination complaints and to provide details including the impairments relied on, their duration and day-to-day impact, when and how the respondent became aware of them, treatment, alleged discriminatory acts and dates, and the type of prohibited conduct alleged under the Equality Act 2010.
The Tribunal found that the claimant attempted to comply by sending emails and a GP letter, but that the material provided did not answer several required matters and was insufficient for the Tribunal or respondent to understand the disability discrimination complaint being brought. The Tribunal considered a lesser sanction but decided that, given the claimant had already had multiple opportunities and the Unless Order was intended to provide certainty and finality, it was not in the interests of justice to allow a further opportunity.
Any complaint of disability discrimination was struck out. The judgment recorded that the claimant's remaining unfair dismissal claim stayed listed for hearing on 4, 5 and 6 February 2026.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Any disability discrimination complaint was struck out for non-compliance with an Unless Order requiring further particulars. The unfair dismissal claim was not adjudicated in this judgment and remained listed for hearing. | Struck out | 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.