Case 1804633/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person assisted by Mr I Rehman (trade unionist) For the v Respondent — 2021
- Case reference
- 1804633/2019
- Decision date
- 4 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lancaster Appearance
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person assisted by Mr I Rehman (trade unionist) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal first considered whether the claimant was disabled within the meaning of section 6 and Schedule 1 Equality Act 2010. It found that she had a mental impairment, namely anxiety and depression, with resultant insomnia, stress and panic attacks, and that from 11 June 2019 the effects had become substantial and long-term. Before that date, however, the tribunal found the evidence showed a pattern of exam stress and discrete episodes of stress rather than an impairment that was substantially adversely affecting normal day-to-day activities for the purposes of the Act.
In reaching that conclusion, the tribunal accepted that the claimant had been first diagnosed with anxiety and depression on 14 August 2018 and had been prescribed medication and referred for counselling. It nevertheless discounted earlier GP attendances for stress as short-term reactions to adverse life events, referring to J v DLA Piper UK LLP and to section C6 of the 2011 Guidance on the definition of disability. It also considered Herry v Dudley Metropolitan Council but distinguished the claimant’s position from a mere entrenched refusal to work.
The tribunal noted that the claimant’s account of severity was exaggerated in some respects, but also found evidence of interrupted sleep, panic attacks and distress that was sufficient to amount to a substantial adverse effect by the relevant later date. It held that by 11 June 2019 the claimant had been signed off as unfit to work except with adjustments to accommodate flexible working, and that by then it was likely the adverse effects would last at least 12 months.
Claim number 1804633/2019 was therefore dismissed because the alleged acts of disability discrimination in that claim occurred before 11 June 2019, when the tribunal found the claimant was not in fact disabled. The tribunal noted that allegations relating to dismissal on 30 September 2019 and rejection of the appeal on 10 December 2019 could still continue in claim number 1801065/2020.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed because, at the date of the alleged acts in this claim, the tribunal found the claimant was not yet disabled. The tribunal held that she became disabled within the meaning of section 6 Equality Act 2010 only from 11 June 2019. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- section 6 Equality Act 2010
- Schedule 1 Equality Act 2010
- Section C6 of the Guidance on the definition of disability (2011)
- J v DLA Piper UK LLP
- Herry v Dudley Metropolitan Council
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.