Mr S Kirby v Key Office Solutions Limited — 2020

Mr Kirby worked for Key Office Solutions Limited as a trainee service engineer for about 17 months. After a left ankle injury on 2 July 2018 he went on sick leave. The tribunal found that the respondent knew of his ankylosing spondylitis at least by 10 August 2018 from rheumatology letters, and it later allowed a late amendment to add victimisation after Mr Braniff's evidence indicated that fear of a claim had formed part of the dismissal rationale. The unfair dismissal claim was not pursued because the claimant lacked the requisite service.

On liability, the tribunal preferred the claimant's evidence where there was conflict. It found that the respondent initially discussed arrangements for him to return to work, including the possible use of an automatic vehicle or transport to jobs, but then withdrew that support, removed his laptop and email access without explanation, and on 9 November 2018 dismissed him on purported redundancy grounds. The tribunal rejected redundancy as the real reason. It held that the refusal to support a return to work and the dismissal were direct discrimination, that the respondent had failed to make reasonable adjustments by not properly considering the automatic-car proposal, that the treatment also amounted to discrimination arising from disability under s.15, and that the dismissal was victimisation because the directors feared he would bring a disability discrimination claim. It did not treat the email-access issue as direct discrimination, accepting the respondent's evidence that it was connected to concerns about data interference and an alleged vendetta.

At remedy, the tribunal awarded ten weeks' loss of earnings at 346 per week, totalling 3,460, with interest of 204.76, and injury to feelings of 20,000, with interest of 2,367.12. It assessed injury to feelings in the middle Vento band at the higher end. The total discrimination award was 26,031.88, and the tribunal separately ordered costs of 7,260 inclusive of VAT.