Claimant v London Domestic Appliances (UK) Ltd

The tribunal found that the claimant was entitled to accrued and unpaid holiday pay of £1496.96 agreed by the respondent plus £480 for 5 days in January and February 2023. The respondent had not paid this sum and had unlawfully deducted from it.

The claimant was entitled to one week's notice pay. The tribunal found he was dismissed on 24 February 2023 with notice to 1 March 2023, but was not paid his notice pay of £458.77 gross.

The respondent unlawfully deducted speeding and parking fines totalling £719.94 from the claimant's wages without written agreement as required by s.13 ERA 1996. The tribunal also found the claimant was entitled to pay for 138 hours travel time back to depot at £12/hour (£1656) plus £50 for a Bournemouth trip. However, the claim for guaranteed 40 hours per week failed as the claimant was on a zero hours contract, and the claim for 5 hours 45 minutes in January/February 2023 also failed.

The tribunal found no facts from which it could conclude the claimant was treated less favourably than a hypothetical comparator because of his disability (OCD). The treatment he received was not less favourable under s.13 than someone without his disability in similar circumstances would have received.

The tribunal found the respondent did make reasonable adjustments for the claimant's OCD, including allowing him to adjust time cards to fit his numerical patterns and permitting extra time to arrange the van contents in a particular order. The tribunal found no failure under ss.20 and 21 Equality Act 2010.

Section 15 Equality Act 2010 (discrimination arising from disability): The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed because of something arising from his disability (the onerous adjustments to time cards and pay records required by his OCD), which was unfavourable treatment. However, the respondent successfully established the justification defence under s.15(1)(b) — the dismissal was a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aims of managing the business reasonably, protecting the workforce, and addressing serious health and safety concerns arising from the claimant's conduct.