Key facts
- Accenture (UK) Ltd is appealing a January 2026 Employment Appeal Tribunal decision in the case of Sanju Pal.
- The original tribunal found the dismissal unfair on procedure but cut compensation to zero, concluding a fair process would have led to the same outcome.
- The Employment Appeal Tribunal held capability must be judged against the work the employee was employed to do.
- The appeal tribunal also found the original tribunal failed to properly assess how endometriosis affected Pal's day-to-day activities.
- Rachel Crasnow KC represents Pal at the Court of Appeal hearing on November 10 and 11, 2026, per Cloisters.
Accenture (UK) Ltd asked the Court of Appeal on November 10, 2026, to restore an employment tribunal decision in its long-running case against former consultant Sanju Pal, according to Law360. The appeal concerns how employers assess capability under an "up or out" promotion model and how tribunals decide whether the effects of endometriosis amount to a disability under the Equality Act 2010, Cloisters said.
Pal worked at Accenture for around ten years before her dismissal in 2019. Accenture assessed her performance under its "up or elsewhere" model, which treated a lack of readiness for promotion as underperformance, Cloisters said. Pal was experiencing significant symptoms of endometriosis around the time of her dismissal.
The original employment tribunal found procedural failings made the dismissal unfair but reduced compensation to zero because it concluded a fair process would have led to the same outcome. It also found Pal was not disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010.
In January 2026 the Employment Appeal Tribunal allowed Pal's appeal. It held the tribunal had applied the wrong approach to assessing whether Accenture would or might have dismissed her had it followed a fair procedure. It also held capability must be assessed by reference to the work the employee was employed to do, so a lack of readiness for promotion may fall outside capability as a potentially fair reason for dismissal.
On disability discrimination, the appeal tribunal held the original tribunal had failed to properly assess evidence of how endometriosis affected Pal's day-to-day activities. It identified errors in the assessment of what Accenture could reasonably have been expected to know about any disability and whether the treatment complained of was proportionate. It sent the case back to a differently constituted employment tribunal for reconsideration.
Rachel Crasnow KC will represent Pal at the Court of Appeal on November 10 and 11, 2026, leading Elaine Banton of Doughty Street Chambers and instructed by Gerard Airey of Kilgannon & Partners LLP, Cloisters said.