in person For the v Mr P. Bownes (representative) — 2023

This was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Faulkner sitting alone. The tribunal considered only whether Mr Whyman was a disabled person within the meaning of section 6 Equality Act 2010 during the agreed relevant period of 16 September 2020 to 13 April 2022. The underlying case had included claims of unfair dismissal, age discrimination and disability discrimination, together with arrears of pay and other payments, but at the hearing Mr Whyman confirmed that he was not pursuing age discrimination. Time limit issues and the final issues for the merits hearing were not determined at this hearing.

The tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence and the medical material before it, including occupational health reports from July 2021 and January 2022, GP letters dated 27 July 2023 and 4 October 2023, his impact statement, and his oral evidence. It found that he had mixed anxiety with depressive disorder with obsessive compulsive disorder tendencies, diagnosed in 2012, and that the condition affected ordinary daily activities in a number of ways, including repeated lateness, tiredness, concentration difficulties, sensitivity to noise, limitations on conversation and social engagement, and palpitations.

Applying section 6, Schedule 1 and section 212 of the Equality Act 2010, together with the authorities and guidance cited in the reasons, the tribunal held that the adverse effects were more than minor or trivial and had persisted throughout the relevant period. It rejected the respondent's reliance on Herry v Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council, finding that the evidence showed an underlying mental impairment rather than only a reaction to work events. The tribunal therefore held that Mr Whyman was disabled throughout the relevant period by reason of mixed anxiety and depressive disorder with obsessive compulsive disorder tendencies. No liability findings on the substantive claims and no monetary remedy were determined in this judgment.