Case 6016376/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Erika Paulauskaite v GXO Logistics UK Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 6016376/2024
- Decision date
- 12 March 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hutchings
- Venue
- Cambridge
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Erika Paulauskaite
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Hutchings, sitting alone at Cambridge Employment Tribunal, dismissed all of Miss Erika Paulauskaite's claims against GXO Logistics UK Limited. The tribunal first held that the claimant was not a disabled person as defined by section 6 Equality Act 2010 because of a hernia, morphoea, scleroderma or fibromyalgia during her employment with the respondent.
The disability discrimination complaints were dismissed. The complaint of unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability was not well-founded, and the complaint of failure to make reasonable adjustments for disability was also not well-founded.
The tribunal also dismissed the complaint of direct race discrimination, finding it was not well-founded. The complaint of constructive unfair dismissal was likewise not well-founded and was dismissed. No monetary remedy or award was recorded in the judgment.
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; the tribunal also found the claimant was not a disabled person under section 6 Equality Act 2010 during her employment because of the conditions identified in the judgment. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Complaint of failure to make reasonable adjustments for disability was not well-founded and dismissed; the tribunal also found the claimant was not a disabled person under section 6 Equality Act 2010 during her employment because of the conditions identified in the judgment. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | Complaint of direct race discrimination was not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment describes this as a complaint of constructive unfair dismissal; it was not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 6 Equality Act 2010
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.