Claimant v Brampton Manor Trust

The tribunal found the respondent had not committed a fundamental breach of contract. The actions complained of, including requiring attendance at meetings after 4.15pm, allocation of lesson planning work, and yearly flexible working applications, did not amount to a repudiatory breach of the implied term of trust and confidence entitling the claimant to resign.

Claims at paragraphs 13(a) and 13(b) struck out as not presented within time limit under s123(1)(a) EqA 2010, did not form part of conduct extending over a period, and not just and equitable to extend time. Claim 13(c) struck out for acts before 01 May 2023 on same grounds.

Claims at 13(c) (01 May-19 May 2023), 13(d) and 13(e) not well founded. The tribunal found the respondent's conduct had no connection with the claimant's children's disabilities or the claimant's caring responsibilities arising from those disabilities.

Tribunal found it does not have jurisdiction to consider indirect disability discrimination based on association with a person holding a protected characteristic under s19 EqA 2010. Association discrimination is not recognized under the indirect discrimination provisions.

Claim at paragraph 21(a) struck out for acts before 01 May 2023 as not presented within time, not part of continuing conduct, and not just and equitable to extend. Claims 21(b) and 21(c) also struck out on time limit grounds.

Claim at 21(a) for acts 01 May-25 May 2023 failed. The tribunal found Dr Asong was not aware of the claimant's children's disabilities and the conduct had no connection with disability. The tribunal did not accept the claimant's evidence about certain alleged comments.

Claims at 23(a), (b), (c) and (e) struck out for acts before 01 May 2023 as not presented within time, not part of continuing conduct, and not just and equitable to extend time.

Claims at 23(a), (b), (c), (e) (for period 01 May-19 May 2023), 23(d) and 23(f) not well founded. Although some PCPs put women at particular disadvantage, the tribunal found they were justified as proportionate means of achieving legitimate aims including maximising effectiveness of MFL teaching, proper conclusion of meetings, high-quality education, and effective working patterns.