Dr L E Morgan v Maximus UK Services Ltd — 2023

The tribunal considered whether the claimant's dyslexia was a disability under the Equality Act 2010. The respondent did not dispute that the claimant had dyslexia, that it was lifelong, or that the activities relied on were normal day-to-day activities. The dispute was whether the dyslexia had a substantial adverse effect on the claimant's ability to carry out those activities.

The tribunal accepted the 2017 psychological assessment as the most thorough evidence of the claimant's specific learning difficulties, including well-compensated dyslexia, slower reading speed, a working memory deficit, and processing speed below expectations. It rejected or gave limited weight to some parts of the claimant's evidence where it found inconsistency, including evidence that she generally struggled to read books, needed assistance with shopping, or needed help reading utility bills.

The tribunal found that the claimant's earlier education and A&E work showed coping strategies that had often reduced the effect of dyslexia. However, in the respondent's working environment, where she had to manage rapid verbal instruction and read and process large volumes of patient notes, those strategies did not always assist, particularly when fatigue and stress affected oral communication. Applying the low threshold of more than minor or trivial, the tribunal concluded that the adverse effect on reading lengthy documents and processing information for oral communication was substantial. The claimant was therefore a disabled person by reason of dyslexia at all relevant times.