OFSTED

Judgment approved by the court for handing down Ms R Phullar v OFSTED Page 1 [2026] EAT 10 © EAT 2026 Neutral Citation Number: [2026] EAT 10 Case No: EA-2024-000334-RS EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL Rolls Building Fetter Lane, London, EC4A 1NL Date: 14 January 2026 Before : HIS HONOUR JUDGE AUERBACH - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between : MS R PHULLAR Appellant/Cross-Respondent - and – OFSTED Respondent/Cross-Appellant - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Nicola Newbegin (instructed by UNISON Legal Services) for the Appellant/Cross-Respondent Dominic Bayne (instructed by TLT LLP) for the Respondent/Cross-Appellant Hearing dates: 11 and 12 November 2025 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT Judgment approved by the court for handing down Ms R Phullar v OFSTED Page 2 [2026] EAT 10 © EAT 2026 SUMMARY UNFAIR DISMISSAL; DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION The claimant in the employment tribunal underwent an operation for cancer necessitating a number of months’ absence from work. She returned on the basis of limited hours and duties. After a further period of months she was dismissed on the basis of continuing incapability to perform the full duties of her role. The employment tribunal upheld some complaints of failure to comply with the duty of reasonable adjustment but dismissed others. It also dismissed a complaint of unfair dismissal and a complaint of discrimination, by dismissal, contrary to section 15 Equality Act 2010. The respondent rightly conceded that the tribunal erred in law in respect of the section 15 complaint by applying the wrong legal test. In a number of other respects there was a paucity of fact-finding to support the tribunal’s conclusions, and the tribunal failed to provide sufficient reasons to address key arguments and explain to the parties why they had won or lost, compounded by some ap…