X v The Chief Constable of Gwent Police & Anor

X v The Chief Constable of Gwent Police & Anor

The respondent's placement of the claimant on restricted duties and intrusive questioning were acts of direct disability discrimination, harassment, and unfavourable treatment arising from disability, not justified by any legitimate aim or proportionate means. The respondent failed to conduct a proper risk assessment, relied on stigma and misconceptions about HIV, and did not consider less restrictive alternatives. The conduct caused significant injury to feelings and was aggravated by the respondent's disclosure of the claimant's diagnosis without consent.

Parties
Claimant: X; First Respondent: The Chief Constable of Gwent Police; Second Respondent: Susan Barlow
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Employment Tribunal / Final Judgment After Full Hearing
Outcome
Claims of direct disability discrimination, harassment, and discrimination arising from disability succeed; indirect discrimination claim dismissed; all claims against the second respondent dismissed upon withdrawal.
Legal Topics
Disability Discrimination, Direct Discrimination, Indirect Discrimination, Harassment, Discrimination Arising From Disability, Remedies in Discrimination Cases, Aggravated Damages, Injury to Feelings, Equality Act 2010
Employment Law Equality and Discrimination Disability Discrimination Direct Discrimination Indirect Discrimination Harassment Discrimination Arising From Disability Remedies in Discrimination Cases +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 7 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

X

Claimant

The Chief Constable of Gwent Police

First Respondent

Susan Barlow

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Tribunal / Final Judgment After Full Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was subjected to direct disability discrimination under the Equality Act 2010
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was subjected to indirect disability discrimination
  3. 3 Whether the claimant was harassed related to disability

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent's placement of the claimant on restricted duties and intrusive questioning were acts of direct disability discrimination, harassment, and unfavourable treatment arising from disability, not justified by any legitimate aim or proportionate means. The respondent failed to conduct a proper risk assessment, relied on stigma and misconceptions about HIV, and did not consider less restrictive alternatives. The conduct caused significant injury to feelings and was aggravated by the respondent's disclosure of the claimant's diagnosis without consent.

Court Disposition

Claims of direct disability discrimination, harassment, and discrimination arising from disability succeed; indirect discrimination claim dismissed; all claims against the second respondent dismissed upon withdrawal.

Orders

  • Respondent to conduct a formal, written risk assessment before taking action regarding officers diagnosed with HIV.
  • Respondent to consult with the claimant or an HIV specialist organisation before implementing HIV policy within 6 months.