Mr M Vaid v Royal Mail Group Ltd: 3204647/2022 and 3200373/2023

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS

Case No 3204647/2022, 3200373/2023

Between

Mr M VaidClaimant

Royal Mail Group LtdRespondent

Before

Employment Judge B Beyzade

Members

Mrs J Henry

Mr S Woodhouse

Mr Chevan Ilangaratne (instructed by Counsel) for respondent

Date 14 July 2026

JUDGMENT

[1.1]The claimant's complaint of harassment related to disability concerning the alleged referral for ill-health retirement on 16 February 2021 (paragraph 5.1.1 of the List of Issues) constituted a one-off act and not conduct extending over a period for the purposes of section 123 Equality Act 2010. The complaint was therefore presented outside the applicable time limit. The Tribunal declines to extend time on the just and equitable basis. Accordingly, that complaint is dismissed.

[1.2]The claimant's complaints of failure to make reasonable adjustments, insofar as they relate to the period between 2 June 2020 and 8 October 2020, including the alleged provision of a work cabinet, not requiring the claimant to sort mail in the sorting office, not requiring him to do deliveries and work indoors only, and adjusting his working hours, were presented outside the applicable statutory time limits. Those matters were not part of a continuing omission extending into the later period commencing on 31 May 2022. The Tribunal declines to extend time on the just and equitable basis. Accordingly, those complaints relating to the period 2 June 2020 to 8 October 2020 are dismissed.

[1.3]The claimant's complaint of harassment related to disability concerning Kevin Ituko visiting the claimant's home in August 2021 (paragraph 5.1.2 of the List of Issues) was presented outside the applicable time limit. The Tribunal considers it just and equitable to extend time in respect of that complaint. The complaint is well founded and it succeeds.

[1.4]The claimant's complaint of harassment related to disability concerning the comment "don't play the stress card" (paragraph 5.1.4.2 of the List of Issues) succeeds.

[1.5]The claimant's complaint of harassment related to disability concerning the comment that the claimant should go off sick if he could not do the role (paragraph 5.1.4.3 of the List of Issues) succeeds.

[1.6]Save as provided at paragraphs 1.1 and 1.3 to 1.5 above, the claimant's remaining complaints of harassment related to disability are not well founded and they are hereby dismissed.

[1.7]The claimant's complaints of discrimination arising from disability contrary to section 15 Equality Act 2010 are not well founded and they are hereby dismissed.

[1.8]Save as provided at paragraph 1.2 above, the claimant's remaining complaints of failure to make reasonable adjustments contrary to sections 20 and 21 Equality Act 2010 are not well founded and they are hereby dismissed.

[1.9]The claimant's complaints of victimisation contrary to section 27 Equality Act 2010 are not well founded and they are hereby dismissed.

[1.10]The claimant's complaint of constructive unfair dismissal is not well founded and it is hereby dismissed.

[1.11]The claimant is awarded compensation for injury to feelings arising from the respondent's acts of harassment related to disability found proved at paragraphs 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5 above, in the sum of TWELVE THOUSAND POUNDS (£12,000.00).

[1.12]The claimant is awarded interest on that sum in the amount of FOUR THOUSAND AND THIRTY-NINE POUNDS AND EIGHTY-NINE PENCE (£4,039.89).

[1.13]The respondent is ordered to pay the claimant the total sum of SIXTEEN THOUSAND AND THIRTY-NINE POUNDS AND EIGHTY-NINE PENCE (£16,039.89).

[1.14]No award is made for financial loss. The claim for compensation for personal injury is dismissed. No recommendation is made and no uplift is awarded under section 207A Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. Approved by: