Case 1303120/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Adele Smith v Dunton Environmental Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1303120/2022
- Decision date
- 25 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gilroy KC
- Venue
- Midlands West
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Adele Smith
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the preliminary hearing on 6 October 2023 before Employment Judge Gilroy KC, the tribunal was asked to decide whether Ms Adele Smith was a disabled person within the meaning of s.6 Equality Act 2010 for the purposes of her disability discrimination claims, by reference to dyslexia and/or ADHD. Shortly before the hearing, the Respondent no longer contested that she was disabled by reference to dyslexia, so the only issue for determination was whether she was disabled by reason of ADHD at the relevant time.
The Claimant relied on a disability impact statement, a report from Ms Alison Earey dated 7 October 2019, and a self-completed ADHD checklist (ASDV1). The tribunal noted that Ms Earey’s report was an assessment of dyslexia, not ADHD, and that she had said the Claimant might wish to pursue an assessment for dyspraxia and ADHD. There was no medical diagnosis of ADHD in the material before the tribunal, no supporting GP records, and no expert evidence allowing the tribunal to determine whether the symptoms described by the Claimant were attributable to dyslexia or ADHD. The tribunal also treated the self-completed ADHD form as a subjective document.
The tribunal was not persuaded on the balance of probabilities that the Claimant had ADHD at the relevant time, so the question whether ADHD amounted to a disability under s.6 did not arise. The judgment records that, as far as the disability claims were concerned, the case would proceed solely in relation to the admitted condition of dyslexia.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary issue only. The tribunal found that, at the time of the events, the Claimant was not disabled by reason of ADHD. The Respondent no longer contested disability by reference to dyslexia, so the case was to proceed only on the admitted condition of dyslexia. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.6 Equality Act 2010
- balance of probabilities
- substantial and long term adverse effect on ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.