Ms M Williams v City Academy Arts — 2024

At a preliminary hearing, the tribunal considered whether the claimant was an employee within section 83 Equality Act 2010 and whether she was disabled during the relevant period. The tribunal found that, despite contractual wording describing the claimant as self-employed, the practical limits on substitution, the effect of declining work, the respondent's degree of control over quality, and the application of grievance and harassment procedures meant she was a worker for Equality Act purposes.

The tribunal also found that the claimant was disabled because of ADHD, combined with symptoms of anxiety and depression. It accepted that these conditions had a substantial adverse effect on day-to-day activities during the relevant period, including time awareness, organisation, administration, forgetfulness, tiredness following panic attacks, and the time taken to complete work and domestic tasks.

The judgment did not determine the substantive discrimination, harassment or victimisation complaints. It recorded that the complaints of disability, sex and race discrimination, including harassment and victimisation, would proceed.