Claimant v City of Westminster
Outcome
Individual claims
The claimant was not shortlisted for a Public Health role on 24 February 2023, where the shortlisting used factors not listed in the advertisement or job description. The tribunal found this created a humiliating environment in the highly fact-specific circumstances of the case (involving a context of unsuccessful job applications), although it was unintentional. This amounted to harassment related to disability.
The tribunal did not uphold the claimant's claims of direct disability discrimination across the various allegations considered at the liability hearing.
The tribunal did not uphold the claimant's claims of unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability.
The tribunal did not uphold the claimant's claims that the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments for her disability.
Facts
The claimant, who has disabilities including ADHD and autism, applied for a Public Health role with Westminster City Council. On 24 February 2023, she was not shortlisted for the role because the shortlisting used criteria not listed in the job advertisement or description, raising concerns about fairness. The respondent investigated her complaint, found indirect discrimination, and took steps to prevent repetition. The claimant had experienced declining mental health during maternity leave and found many aspects of her employment upsetting, though most did not amount to discrimination.
Decision
The tribunal upheld one claim of harassment related to disability concerning the February 2023 job application. The tribunal awarded £5,000 for injury to feelings in the lower Vento band, finding this was a single isolated event causing some but not very serious distress. No award was made for psychiatric injury or financial loss. The claimant's other claims for direct discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, failure to make reasonable adjustments, and other harassment allegations failed.
Practical note
Even where a claimant experiences significant general upset at work and has pre-existing mental health conditions, tribunals will carefully apportion injury to feelings only to the specific discriminatory acts proven, applying divisibility principles where there is a rational basis to separate the effects of lawful and unlawful conduct.
Award breakdown
Vento band: lower
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2208546/2023
- Decision date
- 6 June 2025
- Hearing type
- remedy
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- local government
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No