Deloitte LLP and Mr P Gooch
Case Summary
The claimant, Mrs B Sritharan, was dismissed from her role at Deloitte LLP. The tribunal found that the claim of direct race discrimination and victimisation failed, as did claims for indirect disability discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments. Only two allegations of discrimination arising from disability succeeded.
Key Issues
- •direct_race_discrimination
- •victimisation
- •indirect_disability_discrimination
- •discrimination_arising_from_disability
- •failure_to_make_reasonable_adjustments
- •unfair_dismissal
Claim Types
Cited Laws and Legal Issues
ents fails and is dismissed. 2 6. The claim of unfair dismissal fails and is dismissed. All claims against the 2 n
on and victimisation failed, as did claims for indirect disability discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments. Only two al
loitte LLP. The tribunal found that the claim of direct race discrimination and victimisation failed, as did claims for indirect di
Decision Text
1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS JUDGMENT BETWEEN CLAIMANT RESPONDENT MRS B SRITHARAN V DELOITTE LLP (1) MR P GOOCH (2) HELD AT: LONDON CENTRAL ON: 9 - XXXX MAY & 8 JUNE 2022 EMPLOYMENT JUDGE EMERY MEMBERS: MS D KEYNES Mr I MCLAUGHLIN REPRESENTATION: For the claimant: Mr M O’Carroll (counsel) For the respondent: Ms B Williams (counsel) JUDGMENT Against the 1 st respondent: 1. The claim of direct race discrimination fails and is dismissed 2. The claimant of victimisation fails and is dismissed 3. The claim of indirect disability discrimination fails and is dismissed 4. The claim of discrimination arising from disability – two allegations succeed (5.1.10 & 5.1.13), the rest fail and are dismissed 5. The claim of a failure to make reasonable adjustments fails and is dismissed. 2 6. The claim of unfair dismissal fails and is dismissed. All claims against the 2 nd respondent fail and are dismissed. REASONS The Issues The claimant was dismissed from her role for ‘some other substantial reason’, what the respondents characterise as an irretrievable breakdown in her relationships with colleagues, with no prospect of a suitable alternative role in the business. She contends that she was continuously discriminated against, commencing with the decision to hire her as a Technical Director and not as a Director, to the date of her dismissal. She argues that her treatment constitutes direct race discrimination on the grounds of her Sri Lankan origins. She contends that she was victimised for raising allegations of discrimination. The respondents accept that she was disabled from January 2020 with depression and anxiety (but not that ...
Employer
Case Details
- Case Number
- 2201559/2020
- Tribunal
- Employment Tribunal
- Level
- First instance
- Decision Date
- 12/09/2022
- Published
- 23/09/2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- EMERY