Ms L Edington v North West Boroughs Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (England and Wales : Disability Discrimination : Redundancy : Sex Discrimination : Unfair Dismissal : Unlawful Deduction from Wages) [2017] UKET 2400129/2017 (7 September 2017)

The tribunal found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed and subjected to unlawful discrimination, as the redundancy process was flawed and discriminatory factors influenced the decision.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2017] UKET 2400129/2017
Parties: Claimant: Ms L Edington; Respondent: North West Boroughs Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
Jurisdiction: United Kingdom
Judgment Date: 07 September 2017
Procedural Posture: Employment Tribunal / Final Judgment
Outcome: Claim upheld in part
Legal Topics: Disability Discrimination, Redundancy, Sex Discrimination, Unfair Dismissal, Unlawful Deduction From Wages

Employment Law Equality Law Disability Discrimination Redundancy Sex Discrimination Unfair Dismissal Unlawful Deduction From Wages

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Ms L Edington

Claimant

North West Boroughs Partnership NHS Foundation Trust

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Tribunal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed
2 Whether the claimant was discriminated against on the basis of disability and sex
3 Whether redundancy procedures were lawfully followed

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed and subjected to unlawful discrimination, as the redundancy process was flawed and discriminatory factors influenced the decision.

Court Disposition

Claim upheld in part

Orders

Compensation awarded to claimant
Respondent ordered to pay outstanding wages

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.