Victimisation claim dismissed: Dignity at Work complaint not a protected act
A former employee of Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust lost her victimisation claim after the tribunal found that her Dignity at Work complaint did not amount to a protected act under equality law. She was also ordered to pay £17,000 in costs.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #victimisation
- #dignity-at-work-complaint
- #time-limits
- #disability-status-not-established
- #costs-awarded
Key facts
- The claimant was dismissed on 30 November 2018 for misconduct while subject to a final written warning.
- The claimant raised a verbal complaint on 26 September 2017 and a written Dignity at Work complaint on 8 March 2018.
- The tribunal found that neither complaint constituted a protected act under section 27 of the Equality Act 2010.
- The claimant was not disabled at the material time due to the impairments relied upon.
- The claimant's victimisation claim was dismissed as there was no causal link between any protected act and the dismissal.
- The claimant was ordered to pay costs capped at £17,000.
Timeline
-
Return to work meeting
The claimant had a return to work meeting with Ms McDougall, which she felt was patronising and confrontational.
-
Verbal complaint to Fiona Halstead
The claimant made an informal verbal complaint about Ms McDougall's conduct at the return to work meeting.
-
Suspension
The claimant was suspended on allegations of misconduct and poor performance.
-
Written Dignity at Work complaint
The claimant submitted a formal written Dignity at Work complaint against Ms McDougall.
-
Finalised Dignity at Work complaint
The claimant submitted a finalised version of her Dignity at Work complaint on the prescribed form.
-
Disciplinary hearing (first session)
Dr Herbert heard the disciplinary allegations against the claimant over two sessions.
-
Disciplinary hearing (second session)
The disciplinary hearing concluded with findings of misconduct.
-
Dismissal
The claimant was dismissed on six weeks' notice for misconduct.
-
Claim presented to tribunal
The claimant presented her claim to the Employment Tribunal.
-
Preliminary hearing on time limits
Employment Judge Maidment dismissed claims for unfair dismissal and unauthorised deductions as out of time, but allowed disability discrimination claims to proceed on just and equitable grounds.
-
Preliminary hearing on disability status
Employment Judge Rogerson found the claimant was not disabled in relation to the impairments relied upon, leading to dismissal of disability discrimination claims.
-
Final hearing (victimisation claim)
The final hearing of the sole remaining victimisation claim took place over five days.
-
Judgment dismissing victimisation claim
Employment Judge Lancaster dismissed the victimisation claim, finding no protected act and no causal link to dismissal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employee had carried out a protected act (such as alleging discrimination) under the Equality Act 2010, and if so, whether she was subjected to detriments, including dismissal, because of that act.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the victimisation claim in its entirety.
- The employee's verbal complaint in September 2017 and her written Dignity at Work complaint in March 2018 were not protected acts because they did not allege a breach of the Equality Act 2010.
- Even if they had been protected acts, there was no evidence that the dismissal was caused by them.
- The employee was ordered to pay costs of £17,000 due to the unreasonable way she conducted the proceedings.
Lessons & takeaways
- To bring a victimisation claim, you must show you did a 'protected act' – such as making a complaint about discrimination under the Equality Act. A general workplace complaint may not qualify.
- Keep records of any complaints you make that specifically reference discrimination or harassment on protected grounds like disability, race, or sex.
- Tribunals can award costs against you if they find you have acted unreasonably in bringing or pursuing a claim – even if you are representing yourself.
- If you are relying on a disability, you need medical evidence to show it meets the legal definition of disability under the Equality Act – short-term conditions do not count.
When a workplace complaint is not enough
This case shows the importance of framing complaints in the right legal terms. The former employee had raised concerns about the conduct of a manager, first verbally and then through a formal Dignity at Work procedure. However, the tribunal found that neither complaint alleged a breach of the Equality Act 2010 – for example, discrimination because of disability or race. Without that, they could not be 'protected acts' under victimisation law.
The employee also argued that her dismissal was linked to these complaints. But the tribunal was not persuaded: the disciplinary process leading to her dismissal was separate and based on misconduct, not on any protected act. The case was further weakened because the employee had already lost her disability discrimination claims at an earlier stage, after the tribunal ruled she was not disabled under the Equality Act.
What the employer did right
Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust followed a clear disciplinary procedure, which helped defend the claim. The trust also successfully applied for costs – a relatively rare step – because the tribunal found the employee had pursued the victimisation claim unreasonably, despite clear legal hurdles.
Key takeaway for employees
If you believe you have been treated unfairly because you raised a discrimination complaint, you need to show that your original complaint was about a protected characteristic. General grievances about management style or interpersonal conflicts will not trigger victimisation protection. Legal advice early on can help you frame complaints correctly and avoid costly tribunal claims that are unlikely to succeed.
Similar cases
Harassment claim against individual manager allowed to proceed late
A former employee's harassment and victimisation claims against her employer were deemed in time if there was conduct over a period, but time was extended for a harassment claim against the individual manager.
Redundancy dismissal and victimisation claims fail: law enforcement officer loses tribunal case
A law enforcement officer with four years' service was fairly dismissed by redundancy and his claims of race and age discrimination, harassment, and victimisation were dismissed by the tribunal.
Whistleblowing and victimisation claims survive strike-out but deposit ordered
A tribunal refused to strike out a universal education facilitator's whistleblowing and victimisation claims against Turning Point, but ordered her to pay a £150 deposit for each to proceed.
Former IT professional's discrimination claim struck out after tampering with evidence
A tribunal struck out a former JP Morgan employee's discrimination claim after he inserted a poem into disclosed documents and sent the tampered version to the tribunal. Most allegations were also dismissed as out of time.