Mr R Stephens v Denholm Logistics UK Ltd — 2021

Mr Stephens was employed as an HGV driver and relied on prostate cancer as a disability. He brought claims of direct disability discrimination in relation to events on 25 and 26 March 2020 and 2 December 2020, and harassment related to disability in relation to events on 3 February 2020, 18 February 2020 and during the redundancy consultation on 2 December 2020. The tribunal heard evidence from the claimant, the respondent's managing director and its transport planner, and found that the material facts were largely not in dispute, with the reason for the events being the main issue.

On 3 February 2020 the tribunal found that the return-to-work meeting with Mr Leath was a standard health and safety procedure applied to all lorry drivers. The meeting was held as privately as possible given the respondent's premises, the claimant did not raise any objection at the time, and the questions about medication were asked of every employee in a similar situation because of the need to ensure drivers were fit to drive 44-tonne vehicles. The tribunal found that the meeting did not have the purpose or effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.

The tribunal also rejected the harassment allegations based on the telephone contact with Mr Moran on 18 February 2020 and 18 March 2020. It found that the 18 February concerns were about a delayed journey and were genuine, reasonable concerns about route timing, and that the claimant did not know about the internal email exchange at the time. For 18 March, the tribunal found that Mr Moran's concern about the claimant's time estimate was reasonable, that the claimant's explanation that repeated calls caused his error was unsustainable, and that the calls were unrelated to disability.

As to the March 2020 holiday and furlough events and the December 2020 redundancy consultation, the tribunal found that the respondent was acting in a measured and pragmatic way in response to Covid, furlough guidance and a site closure decision affecting Southampton. It found that the claimant was offered furlough backdated to 24 March 2020, that his holiday and furlough position was properly considered, and that the redundancy consultation resulted in his transfer to Tilbury rather than redundancy. The tribunal held that the claimant had not established a prima facie case of discrimination, that the respondent's actions were necessary, appropriate and reasonable in the circumstances, and it dismissed the disability discrimination claims.