Ms F Hyland v Aspiedent CIC — 2019

At a preliminary hearing on 9 August 2019, Employment Judge Davies decided whether Ms F Hyland was disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010 when employed by Aspiedent CIC. The tribunal framed the issue by asking whether she had Asperger's syndrome, whether it had a substantial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities, and whether that effect was long-term.

The tribunal accepted that Ms Hyland had been diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome in childhood following assessments by suitably qualified professionals, and that the diagnosis had been supported over time by school, college and university records, autism outreach input, and later confirmation from Dr Davidson and Ms Straker. Although Dr Guest argued that Ms Hyland had been misdiagnosed, the tribunal did not accept that it should go behind the original and later expert diagnoses.

The tribunal found that Asperger's syndrome caused more than minor or trivial adverse effects that had lasted well over 12 months. It accepted difficulties with change, rigidity of thinking, relating to others and communication, and some sensory sensitivity, especially to mouth and nose noises. Those effects meant that Ms Hyland could not travel by bus, could travel by train and car only with difficulty and preparation, and found conversations, forms, interviews, and interaction with colleagues more difficult than a neurotypical person.

The tribunal held that Ms Hyland met the definition of disability in section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 when she was employed by Aspiedent CIC. The judgment records no monetary award and does not decide the merits of the underlying discrimination or breach of contract claims, only that Ms Hyland was entitled to bring disability discrimination claims.