McLaughlin v Charles Hurst Limited (Discrimination - Disability Other) [2018] NIIT 01195_16IT (26 July 2018)

McLaughlin v Charles Hurst Limited (Discrimination - Disability Other) [2018] NIIT 01195_16IT (26 July 2018)

The tribunal found that the respondent had made genuine and sustained efforts to implement reasonable adjustments for the claimant, acted in consultation with Disability Action, and did not discriminate, harass, or victimise the claimant. The evidence did not support the claimant's allegations, and the respondent's conduct did not amount to a repudiatory breach of contract or constructive unfair dismissal. All claims were dismissed.

Citation
[2018] NIIT 01195_16IT
Parties
Claimant: Marie Claire McLaughlin; Respondent: Charles Hurst Limited
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
26 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Industrial Tribunal Discrimination (disability) and Constructive Unfair Dismissal / Final Judgment
Outcome
All claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Disability Discrimination, Constructive Unfair Dismissal, Reasonable Adjustments, Harassment, Victimisation
Employment Law Discrimination Law Disability Discrimination Constructive Unfair Dismissal Reasonable Adjustments Harassment Victimisation

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 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marie Claire McLaughlin

Claimant

Charles Hurst Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Industrial Tribunal Discrimination (disability) and Constructive Unfair Dismissal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent discriminated against the claimant on grounds of disability
  2. 2 Whether the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments
  3. 3 Whether the claimant was constructively unfairly dismissed

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal found that the respondent had made genuine and sustained efforts to implement reasonable adjustments for the claimant, acted in consultation with Disability Action, and did not discriminate, harass, or victimise the claimant. The evidence did not support the claimant's allegations, and the respondent's conduct did not amount to a repudiatory breach of contract or constructive unfair dismissal. All claims were dismissed.

Court Disposition

All claims dismissed