Miss K Woodhouse v Greenwich Leisure Limited — 2026

The respondent accepted that Miss Woodhouse's anxiety was a disability under the Equality Act 2010 and that it knew of the disability at all material times. Occupational health reports from 2019 and 2022 advised additional breaks to help her manage anxiety at work, and the respondent agreed that she could take two breaks of up to ten minutes in addition to her standard break.

The Tribunal found that Ms Fillis criticised those additional breaks by saying that she intended to have them stopped, stating that she was “not having it”, and visibly checking the time when Miss Woodhouse left for and returned from breaks. This conduct adversely affected Miss Woodhouse's anxiety. The Tribunal nevertheless dismissed the direct disability discrimination complaint because Ms Ahmet was not an appropriate actual comparator and because it found that a hypothetical employee without anxiety who took the same additional breaks would also have been criticised; the treatment was therefore not less favourable because of disability.

For the section 15 complaint, the Tribunal found that Ms Fillis's criticism constituted unfavourable treatment, that Miss Woodhouse's need for the breaks arose in consequence of her disability, and that the unfavourable treatment was because of that need. For harassment, it found that the criticism was unwanted conduct related to disability and that, although a prohibited purpose was not established, it reasonably had the effect of creating an intimidating and/or hostile environment for Miss Woodhouse. These findings meant that both complaints would otherwise have succeeded.

The Tribunal found no unreasonable delay in the respondent's handling of either the bullying and harassment grievance or the alleged data-protection grievance, taking account of the collective nature of the former grievance and a cyber-attack. It also found that changing the HR contact did not amount to unprofessional handling, that Miss Woodhouse was not moved to another location on 20 September 2023, and that she had been given Employee Assistance Programme information on more than two occasions.

The last possible discriminatory conduct occurred on 20 September 2023, making the primary limitation deadline 19 December 2023. Miss Woodhouse began ACAS early conciliation on 24 July 2024 and presented her claim on 24 September 2024. The Tribunal declined to extend time on a just and equitable basis because no specific explanation for the nine-month delay was given and the delay had affected witness recollection and the fairness of the hearing. It therefore dismissed the section 15 and harassment complaints as out of time. No monetary remedy was awarded.