Middlesex Learning Trust
Case Summary
Employment Judge Cowen found that Ms A Robinson was disabled due to back pain and migraines from March 2020 to August 2021. The judge did not award costs for the claimant's failure to provide clean copies of documents.
Key Issues
- •disability discrimination
- •failure to provide clean copies of documents
Claim Types
Cited Laws and Legal Issues
vant period. 46. The Claimant’s claims in respect of disability discrimination shall therefore be allowed to proceed. Costs 47. H
Decision Text
Case No 3322927/2021 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant Respondent v Ms A Robinson Middlesex Learning Trust Heard at: Watford (by CVP) On: 8 January 2024 Before: Employment Judge Cowen Appearances For the Claimant: Ms Robinson (in person) For the Respondent: Mr Starceric (counsel) RESERVED JUDGMENT 1. The Claimant was disabled by reason of back pain and migraines between March 2020 and 31 August 2021. 2. No order for costs will be made in relation to the Claimant’s failure to provide disclosure. REASONS Background 1. Apologies are provided to both parties with regard to the delay in providing this decision. 2. The purpose of the Preliminary Hearing was to consider whether the Claimant was disabled within s.6 Equality Act 2010 at the time of the alleged discriminatory acts. 3. A further issue emerged at the hearing with regard to the fact that the Claimant had been asked by the Respondent on 28 November 2023 and ordered by the Tribunal on 3 January 2024 to provide clean copies of the documents she relied upon. The Claimant had failed to do so. It transpired that the bundle for this hearing had been sent to the Claimant only 1 working day prior to the hearing, due to this problem with the documents. Case No 3322927/2021 4. Although he initially raised the issue of postponement, the Respondent’s counsel indicated that he was able to proceed with the hearing and did not therefore press for a postponement. The Tribunal indicated it was content to disregard any highlighting or comments on documents. The Respondent asserted that it would be proper to mark the Claimant’s actions by a costs order. 5. The postponement and costs applications were dealt with as a preliminary issue to the hearing. Submissions from both sides were heard. It was decided having taken into ac...
Employer
Employment Details
- Industry
- Education
- Representation
- Litigant in person
Case Details
- Case Number
- 3322927/2021
- Decision Date
- 13/07/2025
- Published
- 15/10/2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cowen