Cases3300384/2023

Claimant v Ocado Central Services Limited

7 March 2025Before Employment Judge FrenchWatfordremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalfailed

The tribunal found the dismissal was fair. The respondent followed a fair procedure and had reasonable grounds for dismissal. The reason for dismissal fell within the statutory potentially fair reasons.

Direct Discrimination(disability)failed

The tribunal found that the unfavourable treatment was not because of something arising in consequence of the claimant's disability. The respondent's actions were not sufficiently connected to the disability to constitute discrimination under section 15 Equality Act 2010.

Indirect Discrimination(disability)failed

The tribunal found no provision, criterion or practice that put disabled persons generally, or the claimant specifically, at a particular disadvantage. The respondent's conduct did not constitute indirect disability discrimination.

Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments(disability)failed

The tribunal found that the respondent had made reasonable adjustments or that there was no duty to make the specific adjustments claimed. The respondent took appropriate steps to accommodate the claimant's disability.

Breach of Contractfailed

The tribunal found no breach of contract regarding notice pay. The respondent either paid the appropriate notice or was entitled to dismiss without notice due to gross misconduct or other lawful grounds.

Facts

Mr Heenan was employed by Ocado Central Services Limited and was dismissed. He brought claims for unfair dismissal, disability discrimination (unfavourable treatment, indirect discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments), and non-payment of notice pay. The case was heard over three days via video platform with Mr Heenan representing himself and the respondent represented by counsel.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed all of Mr Heenan's claims. The tribunal found the dismissal was fair, that there was no disability discrimination in any form, and that notice pay obligations had been met. The claimant was unsuccessful on all grounds.

Practical note

Self-represented claimants bringing multiple disability discrimination claims alongside unfair dismissal face significant evidential burdens, particularly in demonstrating the connection between treatment and disability.

Case details

Case number
3300384/2023
Decision date
7 March 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
3
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
retail
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
No