Mrs D Czech v New England Seafood International Ltd — 2021

Mrs D Czech had been employed as a team leader from 6 October 2010 and was absent from work after an accident on 4 August 2016. The respondent obtained occupational health and GP evidence, held meetings at her home when necessary, provided an interpreter, and considered the position over an extended period. The tribunal found that the claimant was disabled by reason of her mobility impairment, and that HR had limited notice of mental health issues until Dr Roberts' report in January 2019. It also held that the claimant had not pleaded s.15 or s.20 Equality Act claims, and an application to amend was refused.

The unfair dismissal claim failed. The tribunal found that the reason for dismissal was capability: by February 2019 the claimant had been absent for more than two years, the medical evidence said she remained unfit for work and was unlikely to be fit for at least two years, and the claimant herself agreed with that prognosis at the time. Applying s.98(4) ERA 1996 and the range of reasonable responses approach, the tribunal held that the respondent's process was fair, including the occupational health referrals, meetings, home visit, provision for accompaniment and the appeal process.

The disability discrimination claim also failed. The tribunal found that the claimant was not dismissed because of disability, but because of her prolonged absence, the medical reports and the absence of any prospect of returning to work in the foreseeable future. It further found that the respondent's refusal to proceed with a settlement agreement was because there was a live personal injury claim against the insurer and the respondent did not wish to risk paying twice for the same loss. On that basis, the tribunal held there was no less favourable treatment because of disability and dismissed the Equality Act claim.