OCS Group UK Ltd

Case Summary

Mr Magaji, a Court and Tribunal Security Officer, claimed discrimination arising from disability and failure to make reasonable adjustments following his dismissal on medical capability grounds after suffering a stroke in November 2020. The tribunal found both claims were not well founded and dismissed them. The Claimant had been working for another employer (Bidvest Noonan Security) at substantial hours whilst undergoing occupational health assessments with the Respondent, which was not disclosed.

The tribunal found the claims not well founded, taking into account that occupational health assessments indicated the claimant was unfit for work in any capacity, yet the claimant was simultaneously working substantial hours (up to 60 hours per week) for another employer (Bidvest Noonan Security) without disclosing this to the occupational health doctor or the respondent.

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

• •Discrimination arising from disability (s 15 Equality Act 2010)
• •Failure to make reasonable adjustments (s 20 Equality Act 2010)
• •Medical capability dismissal
• •Whether claimant was unfit for work given concurrent employment at Bidvest Noonan

1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mr P Magaji Respondent: OCS Group UK Limited Heard at: East London Hearing Centre On: 20-23, 27 and 28 January 2026 Before: Employment Judge L Townley Members: Mr O’Callaghan Mrs Forrest Representation For the Claimant: Ms L Badham (Counsel) For the Respondent: Mr S Demba (Community Legal Centre) RESERVED JUDGMENT 1. After hearing from the parties, it is the unanimous decision of the tribunal that the Claimant’s claims for Discrimination Arising From Disability and Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments are not well founded and are dismissed. REASONS Procedural History 1. By claim, presented on 30 November 2022, the Claimant brings claims for discrimination arising from disability and failure to make reasonable adjustments. By order of EJ Howden-Evans, dated 23.08.24, it was determined that while the claims were not presented within the applicable time limit, it was 2 just and equitable to extend time. The Claimant’s employment terminated by the Respondent on 25.03.22 with pay in lieu of notice. 2. The Claimant was employed as a Court and Tribunal Security Officer (CTSO) at the Respondent. The Respondent is a company providing integrated or single line facilities services to clients including the government and public sector. 3. There were six preliminary hearings in this case. Following the dismissal of claims for unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal and holiday pay upon withdrawal by the Claimant, the remaining issues between the parties were set out in a four- page composite list of issues discussed and finalised between the parties on Day 2 of the hearing. 4. The Claimant brings claims for discrimination arising from disability (s 15, Equality Act 2010 (EqA)) and failure to make reasonable adjustments (s 20 EqA). 5. The Respondent conceded that the Claimant was disabled at the material time within the meaning of the Eq…