Case 6018075/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S J Baulch v Independent Pet Care Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 6018075/2025
- Decision date
- 7 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge K. Richardson REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S J Baulch
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat at Southampton by CVP on 12 March 2026 before Employment Judge K. Richardson. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by counsel. Oral reasons were given at the hearing; the written record states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time.
The only substantive finding recorded in the written judgment is that, at the relevant times, Ms S J Baulch was not a disabled person within the meaning of section 6 Equality Act 2010 because of anxiety. On that basis, the claim of direct disability discrimination under section 13 Equality Act 2010 was dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal held that, at the relevant times, the claimant was not a disabled person as defined by section 6 Equality Act 2010 because of anxiety. The direct disability discrimination claim under section 13 Equality Act 2010 was therefore dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.6 Equality Act 2010
- s.13 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.