Project People Ltd and Fujitsu Services Ltd

Case Summary

Mr Robert Shaw, disabled by PTSD, anxiety and depression, claimed discrimination arising from disability and breaches of the duty to make reasonable adjustments against both his employment agency (Project People Limited) and the end-user client (Fujitsu Services Limited). The tribunal heard evidence over five days in April 2026 but decided the case on liability only due to time constraints and incomplete remedy preparation.

The tribunal dismissed all three claims against both respondents. The tribunal found the claimant was not an entirely reliable historian with glaring internal inconsistencies in his evidence and inconsistencies with documentation. Although the Second Respondent was aware the claimant had PTSD from the outset, the tribunal was not satisfied the claimant had flagged up to the Second Respondent that there was a need for adjustments to accommodate that condition in the warehouse operative role.

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

• •Discrimination arising from disability (section 15 Equality Act 2010)
• •Breach of duty to make reasonable adjustments (section 21 Equality Act 2010) - First Respondent
• •Breach of duty to make reasonable adjustments (section 21 Equality Act 2010) - Second Respondent

1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mr Robert Shaw First Respondent: Project People Limited Second Respondent: Fujitsu Services Limited Heard at: Bristol and by CVP On: 13-17 April 2026 Before: Employment Judge Walters Representation Claimant: In person assisted by his wife First Respondent: Mr Jack Mitchell, Counsel Second Respondent: Mr. James Hyde, Counsel JUDGMENT The judgment of the Tribunal is that: 1. The Claimant’s claim against the First Respondent that he suffered discrimination arising from disability contrary to section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 is dismissed. 2. The Claimant’s claim that the First Respondent breached its duty to make reasonable adjustments contrary to section 21 of the Equality Act 2010 is dismissed. 2 3. The Claimant’s claim that the Second Respondent breached its duty to make reasonable adjustments contrary to section 21 of the Equality Act 2010 is dismissed. REASONS Introduction 1. The Claimant commenced proceedings in the Bristol Employment Tribunal on 2 July 2024 alleging, inter alia, that a. the First Respondent had subjected him to unfavourable treatment because of something arising as a consequence of disability contrary to s.15 Equality Act 2010 (hereinafter referred to as “EqA 2010”), b. the First Respondent breached its duty to make reasonable adjustments contrary to s.21 EqA 2010 c. the Second Respondent breached its duty to make reasonable adjustments contrary to s.21 EqA 2010 2. The claim was heard at Bristol between 13-17 April 2026. The last day of the hearing was conducted by CVP with the ready agreement of the parties in order for the Tribunal to give judgment with the parties attending remotely. 3. The Tribunal read all the witness s…