Claimant v Amazon UK Services Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal struck out the public interest disclosure detriment (whistleblowing) claim under Rule 38(1)(a) on the basis that it had no reasonable prospect of success at a full hearing.
The tribunal struck out the sex discrimination claim under Rule 38(1)(a) on the basis that it had no reasonable prospect of success at a full hearing.
The tribunal struck out the age discrimination claim under Rule 38(1)(a) on the basis that it had no reasonable prospect of success at a full hearing.
The tribunal found the claimant was disabled due to musculoskeletal impairment to her shoulder and allowed the direct disability discrimination claim to proceed to a full hearing.
The tribunal found the claimant was disabled due to musculoskeletal impairment to her shoulder and allowed the failure to make reasonable adjustments claim to proceed to a full hearing.
The tribunal found the claimant was disabled due to musculoskeletal impairment to her shoulder and allowed the harassment claim to proceed to a full hearing.
Facts
Mrs Ramshaw brought multiple discrimination and whistleblowing claims against Amazon UK Services Ltd. She required an interpreter for the hearing. She had a musculoskeletal impairment to her shoulder. The matter came before the tribunal at a preliminary hearing to determine disability status and whether certain claims should be struck out.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the whistleblowing, sex discrimination and age discrimination claims as having no reasonable prospect of success. However, it found the claimant was disabled due to her shoulder impairment and allowed her disability discrimination, reasonable adjustments and harassment claims to proceed to a full hearing.
Practical note
A tribunal can strike out some claims while allowing others to proceed where there are sufficient prospects of success on disability-related grounds but not on other protected characteristics or whistleblowing.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6018842/2024
- Decision date
- 24 June 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- retail
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No