Case 6012490/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs D Reardon v Torfaen County Borough Council — 2025
- Case reference
- 6012490/2024
- Decision date
- 15 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge C Sharp
- Venue
- Cardiff
- Panel members
- Mr A Fryer, Mrs J Beard
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs D Reardon
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal heard the case at Cardiff before Employment Judge C Sharp, Mr A Fryer, and Mrs J Beard on 6-8 October and 13-15 October 2025. The claimant was represented by counsel and the respondent was represented by counsel.
The unanimous judgment was that the claimant's unfair dismissal claim was not well founded and was dismissed. The Tribunal also dismissed the claims of discrimination arising from disability and failure to make reasonable adjustments as not well founded.
The written judgment records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within the stated time limit. No remedy or monetary award is recorded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states the unfair dismissal claim was not well founded and was dismissed. Written reasons were not provided in the judgment record. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states the claim of discrimination arising from disability was not well founded and was dismissed. Written reasons were not provided in the judgment record. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states the failure to make reasonable adjustments claim was not well founded and was dismissed. Written reasons were not provided in the judgment record. | 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.