Claimant v H.H. Saudi Research and Marketing (UK) Limited

The tribunal found the respondent applied a PCP requiring all employees to work full-time from the office from 15 February 2022. This put the claimant, who has Crohn's disease and was at higher risk from COVID-19, at a particular disadvantage by increasing his risk of infection and making it harder to manage his symptoms. The respondent failed to justify this PCP as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

The tribunal found the PCP of requiring full-time office attendance put the claimant at substantial disadvantage related to COVID-19 risk and management of his Crohn's disease symptoms. The respondent knew or ought to have known of these disadvantages. The respondent failed to make any adjustment for approximately 16 months until 8 December 2023, despite the claimant requesting flexible working in June 2022. Allowing the claimant to work from home would have been a reasonable adjustment that the respondent failed to implement.

The claimant alleged victimisation in respect of a delay in responding to a loan request and restricted access to ERP accounting software. The tribunal found the delay was an oversight, not deliberate victimisation. Regarding ERP access, the tribunal accepted the respondent's explanation that access levels were allocated by Mr Elshaer based on operational factors, not because of protected acts. The claimant failed to establish a connection between protected acts and the decisions complained of, and suffered no actual detriment as he continued to use the existing Sage system.