Agency worker wins disability and victimisation claims against Torque Retail
An agency worker with a disability was discriminated against and victimised when his assignment was terminated. The tribunal awarded £5,005 in compensation.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was assigned to work for the respondent through an employment agency.
- The claimant made a claim of direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, failure to make reasonable adjustments, harassment related to disability, and victimisation.
- The tribunal upheld the claims of discrimination arising from disability and victimisation.
- The tribunal dismissed the claims of direct disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, and harassment related to disability.
- The respondent was ordered to pay £5,005 in total, including £4,000 for injury to feelings and £329 for loss of earnings.
Timeline
-
First claim form issued
The claimant issued a claim against Know How Resourcing, the employment agency.
-
Acas Early Conciliation commenced
Acas Early Conciliation began in relation to the claim against Torque Retail Services Ltd.
-
First preliminary hearing
Employment Judge Jones held a case management hearing; the claimant was permitted to amend the claim and add Torque Retail Services Ltd as a respondent.
-
Second claim submitted
The claimant submitted a second claim against Torque Retail Services Ltd alone.
-
Second preliminary hearing
The two claims were consolidated and the final hearing was listed for October 2022.
-
Time limit extension granted
Employment Judge McAvoy Newns extended the time limit for the claim against the respondent.
-
Final hearing (day 1)
The final hearing began, covering evidence and submissions on liability.
-
Remedy hearing
The tribunal heard representations on remedy and made an award.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the respondent discriminated against the claimant because of his disability, failed to make reasonable adjustments, harassed him, or victimised him by ending his assignment after he raised concerns.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld claims of discrimination arising from disability and victimisation, but dismissed claims of direct disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, and harassment.
The key reasons were that the respondent terminated the assignment because of something arising from the claimant's disability (his need for adjustments) and because he had previously complained about disability discrimination.
Compensation:
- £4,000 for injury to feelings
- £329 for loss of earnings
- £676 interest
- Total: £5,005
Lessons & takeaways
- Agency workers are protected from disability discrimination and victimisation by their end-user employer, not just the agency.
- Terminating an assignment because an employee needs adjustments can be discrimination arising from disability.
- Responding to a discrimination complaint by ending a worker's assignment is likely to be victimisation.
- Employers should consider reasonable adjustments before taking action against a disabled worker.
What this case shows
This case highlights the protections available to agency workers under the Equality Act 2010. The claimant, who had a disability, was assigned to work for Torque Retail Services Ltd through an agency. After he raised concerns about his treatment, his assignment was terminated. The tribunal found that this termination was both discrimination arising from disability and victimisation.
What the respondent could have done differently
Torque Retail Services could have avoided liability by properly considering reasonable adjustments for the claimant's disability before deciding to end his assignment. They also should not have treated his complaints as a reason to terminate his work. A fair process that engaged with his needs and complaints would have been a more appropriate response.
Why this matters
This decision confirms that end-user employers can be held directly liable for discrimination and victimisation of agency workers. It also shows that tribunals will scrutinise the reasons behind a termination and will protect workers who exercise their rights under equality law. The award of £4,000 for injury to feelings reflects the distress caused by the discrimination and victimisation.
Similar cases
Agency social worker with endometriosis wins disability discrimination claim after placement cut short
An agency social worker with endometriosis had her placement terminated five weeks early due to sickness absence. The tribunal found the council directly discriminated against her and awarded £12,570.
£37,000 for disability discrimination and unfair dismissal: injury to feelings award
A former employee with six years' service has been awarded £37,003.42 after an employment tribunal found Ibco Limited discriminated against him by failing to make reasonable adjustments, harassing and victimising him, and unfairly dismissing him.
Two employees win unfair dismissal and discrimination claims against Ibco Limited
A tribunal upheld claims of unfair dismissal, indirect race discrimination, and victimisation for one former employee, and unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, and failure to make reasonable adjustments for another. Damages of £31,752 were awarded to the first claimant.
Dismissed after crying at work: tribunal finds disability discrimination by default
A former worker with fibromyalgia and other disabilities was awarded £84,599 after her employer failed to defend claims of disability discrimination. The tribunal entered default judgment when the company did not respond.