Cases6003271/2024

Claimant v Cleartech Communications Limited

14 August 2025Before Employment Judge SlaterManchester

Outcome

Partly successful£5,000

Individual claims

Discrimination Arising from Disability (s.15)(disability)succeeded

The tribunal found that the claimant was subjected to unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of his disability. The respondent failed to show that the treatment was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

Direct Discrimination(disability)failed

The tribunal was not satisfied that the claimant was treated less favourably than a hypothetical comparator without the disability would have been treated in the same circumstances. The evidence did not support a finding of direct discrimination.

Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments(disability)failed

The tribunal found that the respondent had not applied a provision, criterion or practice that put the claimant at a substantial disadvantage, or that the respondent had made sufficient adjustments. The claimant failed to establish this claim.

Facts

Mr Akhtar brought claims of disability discrimination against his employer Cleartech Communications Limited. The claimant represented himself at a two-day full merits hearing before a full tribunal panel. The respondent was represented by counsel, Mr Todd. The claims included direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, and failure to make reasonable adjustments.

Decision

The tribunal upheld the claim of discrimination arising from disability, finding that the claimant suffered unfavourable treatment because of something arising from his disability which the respondent could not justify. However, the claims of direct disability discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments were rejected. The claimant was awarded £5,000 for injury to feelings plus interest of £608.

Practical note

Succeeding on a claim of discrimination arising from disability under s.15 EqA 2010 requires showing unfavourable treatment linked to disability and that the respondent cannot objectively justify that treatment, which is distinct from the comparator-based test for direct discrimination.

Award breakdown

Injury to feelings£5,000
Interest£608

Vento band: lower

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

EqA 2010 s.15EqA 2010 s.13EqA 2010 s.20

Case details

Case number
6003271/2024
Decision date
14 August 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
2
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
telecoms
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
No