Case 8001317/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Member E Coyle Tribunal Member G McKay Ms C Goble v Fife Employment Access Trust (FEAT) — 2025
- Case reference
- 8001317/2024
- Decision date
- 6 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Jones Tribunal
- Panel members
- Tribunal Member E Coyle, Tribunal Member G McKay
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Member E Coyle Tribunal Member G McKay Ms C Goble
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningTwo claimants worked on the NIDMAR programme run by the charitable respondent. Ms Goble (administrative assistant and personal disability assistant to Dr Clark) and Dr Clark (programme manager) were both dismissed on 31 March 2024. The Tribunal found that Ms Goble was unfairly dismissed, made a protected disclosure under s.43B ERA 1996 and was subjected to detriments (suspension and disciplinary proceedings alleging fraud) for having done so, was wrongfully dismissed, was a disabled person, and the respondent failed in its duty to make reasonable adjustments. Her redundancy claim and automatic unfair dismissal claim failed.
Dr Clark, accepted by the respondent as disabled by reason of phonologic dyslexia, was unfairly dismissed and the respondent made unlawful deductions from her wages, failed in its duty to make reasonable adjustments, and subjected her to a course of conduct of harassment related to disability. The Tribunal did not accept that she had done a protected act and dismissed the victimisation claim.
The Tribunal awarded Ms Goble £37,727.68 (including £1,095.58 basic award, £4,419.91 compensatory award, ACAS uplift, £8,000 injury to feelings for disability discrimination, £20,000 injury to feelings for protected disclosure detriment and interest) and Dr Clark £58,401.73 (including £21,507.07 compensatory award, ACAS uplift, £25,000 injury to feelings, £2,611.27 holiday pay and interest). Aggregate awards total £96,129.41. PDF text was truncated from 197,607 characters; mid-judgment liability findings could not be reviewed in full.
Claims and outcomes
11 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Ms Goble was not dismissed by reason of redundancy and not entitled to a redundancy payment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Ms Goble was wrongfully dismissed; notice pay £1,055 awarded as part of total. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Ms Goble was not paid £365.19 holiday pay; Dr Clark £2,611.27 holiday pay. | Upheld | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Ms Goble was a disabled person and the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments during her suspension and disciplinary proceedings. £8,000 injury to feelings plus £1,408 interest for failure to make adjustments. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Dr Clark was unfairly dismissed. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Respondent made unlawful deduction from Dr Clark's wages. | Upheld | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Respondent failed in its duty to make reasonable adjustments for Dr Clark. | Upheld |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £96,129
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,096
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £25,927
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.43B Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.27 Equality Act 2010
- s.124(2)(b) 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.