Case 8001166/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms C O’Donnell v Network Rail Infrastructure Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 8001166/2024
- Decision date
- 26 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Mackay
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms C O’Donnell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was an open preliminary hearing to agree the final list of issues for the final hearing, consider whether certain aspects of the claim required amendment, and consider whether any aspects should be struck out as having no reasonable prospects of success.
The claimant indicated that she wished to withdraw her claim under Section 19 of the Equality Act 2010. The respondent did not advance any other strike out application, and the tribunal dismissed the Section 19 claim.
The parties agreed amendments reflected in the attached list of issues. The tribunal recorded that the final hearing would proceed on the agreed list, including issues concerning disability discrimination by association, direct disability discrimination by association, disability-related harassment, victimisation, time limits and remedy.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the claimant indicated she wished to withdraw her claim under Section 19 of the Equality Act 2010, and the tribunal dismissed that claim. The remaining disability discrimination, harassment and victimisation issues were listed for a final hearing and were not determined in this judgment. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Section 19 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.