Ms Z Lalji v Medecho Ltd (England and Wales : Disability Discrimination)

Factual and Procedural Background

The Plaintiff was a disabled person within the meaning of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 from 3 February 2017 onwards. The Plaintiff was dismissed by the Defendant on 22 February 2018. The claims brought by the Plaintiff fall within the jurisdiction of the Employment Tribunal, meeting all procedural requirements including time limits and early conciliation. The hearing was conducted remotely by video over several days in February and March 2021. The Tribunal considered a voluminous bundle of documents and witness statements as part of the evidence.

Legal Issues Presented

1. Whether the Plaintiff was subjected to disability discrimination contrary to sections 15, 19, and 21 of the Equality Act 2010 in relation to remuneration, dismissal, and failure to make reasonable adjustments.
2. Whether the Defendant victimised the Plaintiff in breach of section 27 of the Equality Act 2010.
3. Whether the Plaintiff was subjected to detriment contrary to the National Minimum Wage Act 1998.
4. Whether the Plaintiff was unfairly dismissed contrary to sections 94 and 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
5. Whether the dismissal constituted discrimination under section 39(2)(c) of the Equality Act 2010.
6. Whether the dismissal was discriminatory under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Tribunal found that the Plaintiff was disabled as defined by the Equality Act 2010. It determined that the Defendant’s actions amounted to disability discrimination in various respects: the unfavourable remuneration during home working; dismissal; and failure to make reasonable adjustments including non-payment of basic pay, no agreement on working hours, lack of remote system access, and insufficient measures to mitigate disadvantage. The Tribunal also found victimisation by the Defendant through cessation of vacancy lists, threats regarding alleged breaches of data protection or confidentiality, and stopping commission payments. Furthermore, the Plaintiff was found to have been subjected to detriment in breach of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998. The dismissal was held to be unfair and discriminatory under the relevant provisions of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the Equality Act 2010. However, the claim of discrimination under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 was dismissed. The Tribunal’s conclusions were based on the evidence presented, including witness statements and documentary material, all considered during the remote hearing.

Holding and Implications

The Tribunal found in favour of the Plaintiff on multiple claims including disability discrimination, victimisation, detriment related to minimum wage rights, and unfair dismissal. The claim of discrimination under section 13 of the Equality Act 2010 was dismissed. The remedy hearing was scheduled for a later date to determine appropriate relief. This decision directly affects the parties by establishing liability on the part of the Defendant for the specified unlawful acts. No new legal precedent was established by this judgment.