Case 2302697/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A S Khan v Tesco Stores Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2302697/2022
- Decision date
- 18 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Macey Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A S Khan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal decided a preliminary issue: whether the claimant's plantar fasciitis was a disability under section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 between late 2020 and 16 January 2022. It was agreed that plantar fasciitis was a physical impairment and that its effects were long-term. The respondent had already accepted that the claimant's type 2 diabetes was a disability, but the issue in this judgment concerned plantar fasciitis.
The tribunal found that the claimant had experienced foot pain from 2019, used painkillers, moved from the F&F department to checkouts on medical advice, and avoided work requiring standing for more than an hour. It accepted that from at least February 2021 she had difficulty on waking, sleep disturbance, and continuing limits on standing. It did not accept every alleged effect as substantial, including the asserted limits on walking for only 15 minutes, sleep disturbance, waiting five to six minutes before standing on waking, or evidence about driving and travelling by car.
The tribunal concluded that the claimant's inability to stand for more than one hour, and her avoidance of work requiring that level of standing, had a substantial adverse effect on her ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities, including work requiring lengthy standing. It also considered the role of painkillers and shockwave therapy, but found insufficient evidence to reach reliable conclusions about the deduced effects of medication. Overall, it held that the claimant's plantar fasciitis was a disability during the relevant period.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary hearing judgment on whether the claimant's plantar fasciitis was a disability under section 6 Equality Act 2010 between late 2020 and 16 January 2022. The substantive disability discrimination claim was not determined in this judgment. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
9 references- section 6 Equality Act 2010
- paragraph 5 of Schedule 1 to the Equality Act 2010
- section 212 Equality Act 2010
- Paterson v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
- Goodwin v Patent Office
- Equality Act 2010 Guidance on matters to be taken into account in determining questions relating to the definition of disability
- Aderemi v London and South Eastern Railway Ltd
- EHRC Employment Code
- Elliot v Dorset County 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.