Ms R Duggal v HBOS plc — 2020

The respondent accepted that the claimant was disabled by light sensitivity and frozen shoulder and that it knew of her disability at the relevant times. The tribunal found that the claimant was required to work in bright and fluorescent lighting, that this placed her at a substantial disadvantage because of her light sensitivity, and that the respondent knew of that disadvantage.

The tribunal found that it would have been reasonable to change or dim the lighting, use suitable alternative lighting, paint walls a darker shade, and provide a blind or poster to block light from the banking hall. It held that the respondent failed to take those steps on 19 February 2019 and 13 May 2019, and that the appropriate adjustments were not made until mid to late July 2019. The tribunal described the delay as excessive and wholly unreasonable, particularly because similar adjustments had previously been made at Mayfair and later were made without delay at Oxford Circus.

The complaints concerning the oval-shaped desk, requirement to sit at an angle, and lack of auxiliary aids did not succeed. The tribunal found that the claimant had not shown that the desk setup or the absence of a fully functioning footrest, swivel base, or headset placed her at the alleged substantial disadvantage in relation to her frozen shoulder, and it also found insufficient basis for actual or constructive knowledge of such a disadvantage in respect of the desk issue.

For remedy, the claimant sought only injury to feelings. Applying Vento, the tribunal placed the discrimination in the middle band and awarded £10,000 for injury to feelings, plus £827.82 interest, making a total award of £10,827.82.