Claimant v Secretary of State for Justice
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the dismissal was discriminatory under section 15 Equality Act 2010 (discrimination arising from disability) but justified as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. The appeal rejection was found not to be discriminatory as it was not because of something arising from disability. The dismissal claim was out of time and it was not just and equitable to extend time, but as the appeal was not discriminatory, there was no continuing act to bring the dismissal in time.
The tribunal found the claimant was entitled to 13 weeks' pay in lieu of notice which was agreed on 9 August 2023 but not paid. However, the claim was presented out of time (time limit expired 8 November 2023; claim filed 12 December 2023). Tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to present the claim in time as he knew by October 2023 he had not been paid and was instructed by solicitors. Claim dismissed on jurisdictional grounds.
Facts
The claimant was employed by HM Prison Service at Pentonville Prison as an Operational Grade from 2002 to August 2023. He had disabilities of spinal pain (spinal stenosis) and stress/anxiety. From 2021 onwards he had significant sickness absence and worked on restricted duties for approximately two years, including reduced hours (32 instead of 37) and no manual handling over 10kg. He was off sick from April 2023 due to work-related stress. Following occupational health reports and meetings, he was dismissed on 9 August 2023 on grounds of medical inefficiency after he agreed to accept termination with compensation rather than a regrade to a Band 2 admin role which the governor believed he could not perform due to manual handling requirements. His appeal was rejected on 21 September 2023.
Decision
The tribunal found the dismissal was discriminatory under section 15 but justified as proportionate. The appeal rejection was not discriminatory. The dismissal claim was out of time and not just and equitable to extend. The breach of contract claim (13 weeks' unpaid notice pay) was also out of time and it was reasonably practicable to present in time. All claims dismissed.
Practical note
Even where discrimination is established, the justification defence under section 15 Equality Act 2010 can succeed where an employer demonstrates dismissal was a proportionate response to genuine operational needs, particularly after a lengthy period of reasonable adjustments; strict time limits apply to both discrimination and contractual claims and tribunals will not readily extend time where claimants are legally advised and aware of their rights.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3314517/2023
- Decision date
- 6 August 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 7
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Name
- Secretary of State for Justice
- Sector
- central government
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Operational Grade (OSG)
- Service
- 22 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister