Cases2217674/2023

Claimant v London Borough of Islington

22 May 2025Before Employment Judge D HendersonLondon Centralin person

Outcome

Partly successful

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalnot determined

Within time limits. To be determined at final hearing regarding whether dismissal for alleged gross misconduct was fair and within band of reasonable responses.

Unlawful Deduction from Wagesnot determined

Within time limits. Claimant alleges £1775 should have been paid on 26 July 2023 while appeal was pending. To be determined at final hearing.

Whistleblowingpartly succeeded

Claimant alleged protected disclosure on 3 December 2021 reporting violence. Most detriment allegations out of time except paragraphs 5.1.2, 5.1.8, 5.1.9, 5.1.10. Only these allegations can proceed. Merits to be determined at final hearing.

Direct Discrimination(race)partly succeeded

Most race discrimination claims struck out as out of time. Extension granted for paragraphs 5.1.2 (Ceesay's disdain Jan 2022-June 2023), 8.3.2 (Jackson refusing appeal points 17 Aug 2023), 8.3.3 (Ceesay antipathy to June 2023), 8.3.7 (Ceesay laptop authorisation failure 13 June 2023). Merits to be determined at final hearing.

Direct Discrimination(sex)partly succeeded

Intersectional race and sex discrimination claims mostly out of time. Extension granted only for paragraphs 8.3.2, 8.3.3, and 8.3.7 (same incidents as race claims). Merits to be determined at final hearing.

Direct Discrimination(disability)failed

Claimant established as disabled person for sciatica and asthma (conceded by respondent) but not for cataracts. No medical evidence of cataract diagnosis during relevant period May 2022-June 2023. All disability discrimination claims relating to cataracts struck out. Direct disability discrimination claims linked to detriment allegations all out of time except 5.1.8.

Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments(disability)failed

All reasonable adjustment claims out of time (ergonomic chair, second laptop, larger screens, OH recommendations). Most related to alleged cataract condition which tribunal found was not a disability at relevant times. Claims struck out.

Harassment(race)partly succeeded

Most harassment claims out of time. Extension granted only for paragraph 10.1.2 (disdainful treatment by Ceesay because claimant Black Caribbean and he Black African, January 2022-13 June 2023). Merits to be determined at final hearing.

Victimisationwithdrawn

Claimant withdrew victimisation allegation (refusal to postpone disciplinary hearing 26 May 2023) at preliminary hearing on 27 June 2024.

Facts

Claimant, an Employee Relations Officer for Islington Council, was dismissed for alleged gross misconduct on 15 June 2023. She alleges she made a protected disclosure in December 2021 reporting workplace violence, and subsequently suffered detriments and discrimination on grounds of race (Black Caribbean), sex, and disability (sciatica, asthma, alleged cataracts). She claims her manager Mr Ceesay treated her with disdain, failed to provide reasonable adjustments including ergonomic chair and second laptop for vision problems, allocated her excessive workload, and lied about complaints against her. Her appeal against dismissal was heard on 17 August 2023.

Decision

This preliminary hearing determined time limits and disability status. The tribunal found claimant was not disabled regarding cataracts (insufficient medical evidence of long-term condition during employment). Most claims prior to 7 June 2023 struck out as out of time. Extension granted for limited claims: unfair dismissal and unlawful deductions (in time); selected whistleblowing detriments and race/sex discrimination claims relating to Ceesay's conduct and Jackson's appeal handling. Deposit order refused. Remaining claims to proceed to final hearing listed for June 2026.

Practical note

Tribunals will strictly apply disability definition requirements including medical evidence of long-term effects during the relevant employment period, and may limit continuing act extensions to recent allegations where earlier claims create forensic prejudice, even where time limits are extended.

Legal authorities cited

Concentrix CVG Intelligent Contact Limited v Obi EAT/2020/000365Hendricks v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [2003] ICR 530

Statutes

EqA 2010 s.21EqA 2010 s.26ERA 1996 s.111EqA 2010 s.123EqA 2010 s.27ERA 1996 s.23ERA 1996 s.48ERA 1996 s.207BEqA 2010 s.6EqA 2010 s.13

Case details

Case number
2217674/2023
Decision date
22 May 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
2
Classification
contested

Respondent

Name
London Borough of Islington
Sector
local government
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
Employee Relations Officer

Claimant representation

Represented
No