Case 2304399/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Rommer - Solicitor For the v Ms I Omambala - Counsel PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2019
- Case reference
- 2304399/2018
- Decision date
- 2 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright Appearances
- Venue
- Croydon
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Rommer - Solicitor For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt this preliminary hearing the tribunal decided only the threshold issue of disability under s.6 Equality Act 2010. The claimant relied on endometriosis, adenomyosis and anaemia, and the tribunal accepted that she had those conditions. It considered the medical evidence, the disability impact statement and the expert report, and applied the statutory test requiring a physical or mental impairment with a substantial and long-term adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities.
The tribunal found that the claimant’s symptoms had a cumulative effect: the conditions caused pain, heavy bleeding and anaemia, which in turn led to tiredness and sleep disruption. It accepted evidence that, when symptoms flared, she was unable to walk, stand or drive, and that working and studying were normal day-to-day tasks she was no longer able to carry out. The tribunal also noted that the effect need not be constant and that medical treatment, including the coil inserted on 6/7/2018, was a relevant measure under Schedule 1(5).
On long-term effect, the tribunal accepted that the impairment had lasted at least 12 months at the material time or was likely to last that long, and rejected the expert’s narrower understanding of long-term. It referred to the Equality Act 2010 Guidance, including para B4 on cumulative effects, and concluded that the claimant had discharged the burden of proof. The tribunal therefore found that she was a disabled person for Equality Act purposes, and the case was to proceed to the full merits hearing listed for 6/7/2020.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary hearing only: the tribunal determined that the claimant was a disabled person for the purposes of s.6 Equality Act 2010 at the relevant time (July/August 2018). The merits of the discrimination claim were not decided; the case was listed to proceed to a full merits hearing. | Upheld | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- s.6 Equality Act 2010
- Schedule 1 Equality Act 2010
- Equality Act 2010 Guidance
- paragraph B4 of the Guidance
- Schedule 1(5) Equality Act 2010
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.