Comments made about your complaint behind closed doors can prove you were punished for it.
“VictimisationBeing treated badly because you've raised a complaint, supported someone else's complaint, or done something else the law protects, such as raising a grievance or whistleblowing. It is unlawful in its... succeeded in part; other claims failed. Remedy hearing pending.”
Comments made about your complaint behind the scenes can prove you were punished for raising it, and that counts as unlawful victimisation even when your other claims fail.
- Speaking up about discrimination or your health needs is protected by law. Being treated worse afterwards because of it can be unlawful victimisation.
- Keep a record of what's said about you after you raise a concern, including comments in emails or meetings you weren't meant to see. They can become key evidence.
- A partial win still counts. Ask an adviser to look at every way you were treated, not only the main issue, before deciding you don't have a case.
The situation
A court usher living with anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder and endometriosis brought a series of claims against her employer. She said they had failed to make the adjustments she needed around attendance triggers and flexitime, and that she was unfairly given written warnings for her sickness absence. She also said she was treated badly after raising internal complaints about how she was being managed.
The tribunal saw internal emails and comments made about her along the way. A manager wrote that she was "not owed anything because of being poorly." An HR email discussed not giving her "more ammunition" for future complaints. Elsewhere she was described as "litigious," with a note that her mother was "an employment rights solicitor."
What the tribunal found
The tribunal dismissed her claim that her employer had failed to make reasonable adjustments for her disabilities. It also rejected her claim that the written warnings for her sickness absence amounted to unlawful discrimination arising from her conditions, finding they were a proportionate response to her attendance record.
But on 2 of the 6 ways she said she'd been treated badly after complaining, the tribunal agreed with her. It ruled this amounted to victimisation under section 27 of the Equality Act 2010, a law that protects you from being treated worse because you've complained about discrimination. The comments about not giving her "more ammunition" and about her not being "owed anything" were part of the evidence for that finding.
What happens after you raise a concern about your health or how you're being treated at work matters just as much as the tribunal's final decision. This tribunal didn't need a manager to admit they were punishing someone for complaining. It looked at the pattern, including what was said about her once she'd raised her concerns, and asked whether that treatment followed from the complaint.
This case makes another point. You can win part of your claim even after losing the rest of it. This claimant lost her reasonable adjustmentsChanges an employer must make under the Equality Act 2010 for a disabled employee, where without them the employee would be at a substantial disadvantage compared to non-disabled colleagues. What coun... claim and her discrimination arising claim outright. But she won on two of the six ways she said she was treated badly for complaining. Each part of your case gets looked at on its own facts. A partial win still counts, especially where it shows how you were actually treated once you spoke up.
A separate hearing still has to decide compensation in this case, so the final figure is still open. But the finding that she was victimised stands regardless of what that hearing decides. Once you've raised a complaint about your health or about discrimination, note down what's said about you and by whom, including anything you come across that you weren't meant to see. Get advice early, before that pattern of treatment goes any further. Comments made off to the side are exactly the sort of thing that can end up mattering most.
Scott v The Secretary of State for Justice. Case 6003749/2024. Employment Tribunal. 27 March 2026.