Insights / News
Insights / News
Chevan Ilangaratne acted for the Claimant, Marina Dudding, who had been working for the Respondent, Gravesham Borough Council, since 2001.
Ms Dudding’s most recent post was as ‘Allocations Officer’ within the Housing Options Service. From 2021 onwards, Ms Dudding had worked from home following recommendations made in a stress-risk assessment. Ms Dudding was later reviewed by Occupational Health in May 2023, which concluded that she had displayed symptoms of Agoraphobia, as well as having Depression and Anxiety. From October 2023, the Respondent removed her hybrid working arrangements, and insisted on her coming into the office full-time.
What followed was a series of correspondence sent by Ms Dudding to her then employer, highlighting the negative impact on her health resulting from having to come into the workplace. Periods of sickness absence also then followed.
A further Medical Report in March 2024 confirmed diagnoses of Agoraphobia, Generalised Anxiety Disorder and Moderate Depressive Episodes. Meanwhile, the Respondent decided to trigger a Stage 3 sickness absence process with respect to Ms Dudding (bypassing the Stage 2 process altogether). The Respondent then went on to dismiss Ms Dudding on purported ill-health grounds in May 2024 with twelve weeks’ notice. Ms Dudding appealed her dismissal internally, but this appeal was subsequently dismissed in full.
Ms Dudding then presented a claim to the Employment Tribunal challenging, among other things, the removal of her hybrid working and her subsequent dismissal. After a three-day trial in the London South Employment Tribunal, EJ O’Neill, sitting with a full Tribunal, delivered a reserved judgment.
Ms Dudding succeeded in all her claims of:
1) Ordinary Unfair Dismissal;
2) Discrimination Arising from Disability under S.15 Equality Act 2010 (‘EqA’);
3) Indirect Disability Discrimination under S.19 EqA;
4) Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments under S.20 EqA.
In upholding her complaints of disability discrimination, the Tribunal found that Ms Dudding was disabled, per. S.6 EqA, by way of Agoraphobia, Anxiety and Depression at all material times.
In relation to the removal of hybrid working arrangements, the Tribunal, at para.187 of the judgment, said:
“Further, the Respondent’s insistence upon office‑only working had no clear evidential foundation. Hybrid working remained available to other members of the team, and the Claimant’s duties, which we have found to be largely assessment‑based, were capable of remote supervision through CRM systems and staged quality checks. No explanation was supplied as to why such methods could not be deployed in this case. In the absence of contemporaneous evidence identifying a genuine operational need for early‑morning and full‑time office attendance, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the PCPs were reasonably necessary or proportionate.”
You can read the Tribunal’s full written reasons here.
This case has been referred to as a landmark ruling and has attracted significant press coverage including in The Independent, The Telegraph, and People Management.
Chevan Ilangaratne is a specialist Employment Law practitioner. He represents both Claimants and Respondents/Defendants in statutory and commercial employment disputes. He has acted in a number of preliminary, and multi-day Tribunal hearings in the Employment Tribunal, as well in the High Court proceedings regarding post-termination restrictions and breach of confidence related injunctions.
Most recently, Chevan was led in the Court of Appeal (Abel v Reynolds [2026] IRLR 106), and acted as sole counsel in the Employment Appeal Tribunal.
To find out more, contact Nick Levett on +44 (0)20 7427 4908 or Sura Mustafa on +44 (0)20 7427 4883 for a confidential discussion.
News 1 Jun, 2026
Call: 2021
Practice Director
