We Are Couch Ltd and Ms L Jones

Case Summary

This was a remedy hearing following a liability judgment upholding one complaint of harassment related to disability against the respondents. The claimant sought compensation for injury to feelings and aggravated damages. The tribunal awarded £4000 for injury to feelings with interest totalling £500.73, but refused the claim for aggravated damages, finding the respondents' conduct did not amount to oppressive behaviour warranting such an award.

The tribunal awarded injury to feelings compensation of £4000 based on the claimant's established vulnerabilities and sensitivities which should have required greater care in handling the 360-degree feedback process. The claim for aggravated damages was refused because the tribunal found that the respondents' conduct during the proceedings, including delays in communication and a low settlement offer, was typical of ordinary tribunal litigation rather than oppressive conduct and did not meet the threshold for aggravated damages.

Use these claim-type pages to compare this decision with other published tribunal cases, outcome patterns, and visible award data.

• •Assessment of compensation for injury to feelings following successful harassment related to disability claim
• •Claim for aggravated damages based on alleged oppressive conduct in proceedings
• •Impact of 360-degree feedback process on claimant with known vulnerabilities
• •Application of Vento guidelines to injury to feelings award

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Professor A Bonsall-Redston Respondents: We are Couch Limited (R1) Ms L Jones (R3) Heard at: Cardiff, by video On: 15 September 2025 and the tribunal only in chambers on 10 October 2025 Before: Employment Judge R Harfield Ms Y Neves Ms G Rees Representation Claimant: Mr Redston (the Claimant’s husband) Respondents: Mr Lucey (Director of R1) REMEDY JUDGMENT The unanimous decision of the Tribunal is: 1. The Claimant is awarded: a. £4000.00 (four thousand pounds) injury to feelings; b. £500.73 interest on injury to feelings; 2. The claim for aggravated damages is refused. REASONS 1. Introduction 1.1 This was a remedy hearing following a Liability Judgment where one complaint of harassment related to disability was upheld against R1 and R3. (There is therefore no remedy claim against R2). The Claimant’s other complaints of harassment related to disability, discrimination arising from disability, direct sex discrimination, victimisation, failure to pay holiday pay, deduction from wages, and breach of contract were not upheld and were dismissed. 1.2 We had before us at the remedy hearing the remedy bundle with index; the Claimant’s remedy witness statement, and written submissions from the Respondent. We also had access to the papers from the liability hearing. 1.3 We heard evidence from the Claimant and also from Mr Redston and Mr Lucey relating to one element of the aggravated damages claim. We heard oral submissions from the parties. There was insufficient time to deliberate and give an oral judgment so we reserved judgment to be delivered in writing following a further deliberation day for the tribunal panel. 1.4 The remedies sought are compensation for injury to feelings (with interest) and aggravated damages. 2. The legal principles 2.1 Section 124 Equality Act 2010 sets out the remedies the tribunal can award for a successful cla…