Ministry of Defence
Case Summary
The tribunal dismissed the claim due to lack of jurisdiction under Schedule 9, para. 4(3) Equality Act 2010, which excludes service with the Armed Forces from Part 5 EqA in relation to disability.
Key Issues
- •Breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments
- •Indirect disability discrimination
- •Harassment related to disability
Claim Types
Cited Laws and Legal Issues
a Claim Form on 8 July 2024. By that he complains of disability discrimination and harassment as follows: 1.1. Breach of the duty to
Forces from complaining to the Employment Tribunal of harassment related to race or to religion or belief, is not likely to impinge on
Decision Text
. 1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant Respondent Mr Keelan Swords v Ministry of Defence Heard at: Reading (by CVP) On: 29 and 30 September 2025 Before: Employment Judge S George Appearances For the Claimant: Mr A Line, Counsel For the Respondent: Mr L Dilaimi, Counsel RESERVED JUDGMENT 1. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to consider the claim because Part 5 Equality Act 2010 does not apply to the Claimant’s service with the Respondent insofar as it relates to disability. 2. The claim is dismissed. REASONS Background 1. Following a period of Conciliation which started on 12 April 2024 and ended on 23 May 2024, the Claimant presented a Claim Form on 8 July 2024. By that he complains of disability discrimination and harassment as follows: 1.1. Breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments; 1.2. Indirect disability discrimination; 1.3. Harassment related to disability; and 1.4. Discrimination for a reason arising in consequence of disability. 2. The circumstances of the claim arise out of his service with the Respondent which started on 1 April 2023 and is continuing. In particular, the Claimant at the relevant time was a University Officer Training Corps Cadet at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst Headquarters. He was unsuccessful in two attempts to pass the Army Officer Selection Board Assessment (AOSB) when . 2 he took those tests in August 2022 and October 2023. The circumstances of the claim arise from his allegation that the use of psychometric testing models in the AOSB Assessment and the conduct of the Respondent thereafter amount to unlawful disability discrimination and harassment related to disability. The Claimant was diagnosed with Dyslexia at the age of 6 years and describes his disability for the purposes of the claim as a, “Neurological impairment, Dyslexia / specific ...
Employer
Case Details
- Case Number
- 3306470/2024
- Decision Date
- 17/11/2025
- Published
- 17/12/2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S George