Case 2215254/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Medlock (Lay Representative) For the v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 2215254/2023
- Decision date
- 11 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Fredericks-Bowyer Appearances
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr Medlock (Lay Representative) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a reserved judgment on the preliminary issue of whether the claimant was disabled during his employment with the respondent from 29 September 2022 to 30 May 2023. The claimant alleged disability discrimination through failure to make adjustments and something arising from disability, with fibromyalgia as the claimed disability.
The tribunal accepted that the claimant had fibromyalgia, diagnosed in 2020, with flare ups, chronic pain, fatigue, brain fog and concentration difficulties. It found that the impairment had a substantial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities during the employment period and that the effect was long-term.
The tribunal concluded that the claimant met the definition of disability under section 6 Equality Act 2010 at the time of his employment. The claims were not finally determined and were listed to proceed to trial.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary issue only. The tribunal found that the claimant was disabled within section 6 Equality Act 2010 and had standing to bring a failure to make reasonable adjustments claim; the merits were to proceed to trial. | Other | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary issue only. The tribunal found that the claimant was disabled within section 6 Equality Act 2010 and had standing to bring a discrimination arising from disability claim; the merits were to proceed to trial. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
13 references- section 6 Equality Act 2010
- Morgan v Staffordshire University [2002] IRLR 190
- Guidance on matters to be taken into Account in Determining Questions Relating to the Definition of Disability
- Leonard v Southern Derbyshire Chamber of Commerce [2001] IRLR 19
- Goodwin v Patent Office [1999] ICR 302
- s212 Equality Act 2010
- Anwar v Tower Hamlets College EAT 0091/10
- Aderemi v London and South Eastern Railway Limited [2012] UKEAT/316/12
- Paterson v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2007] IRLR 763
- Elliot v Dorset County Council [2021] IRLR 880 EAT
- Paragraph 2(1) Schedule 1 Equality Act 2010
- McDougall v Richmond Adult Community College [2008] ICR 431
- SCA Packaging Limited v Boyle [2009] ICR 1056
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.