Ms Arora v Hanover Communications International Ltd — 2025

Employment Judge Evans sat alone at London South by video on 10 April 2025. The only issue determined in this reserved reasons judgment was whether Ms Arora had a disability within section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 during the relevant period of her employment with Hanover Communications International Ltd. The tribunal accepted that the relevant period ran from 27 April 2023 to a date between 25 May 2023 and 2 June 2023, but did not make a finding on the exact end date because it was unnecessary to do so.

The tribunal found that Ms Arora had the mental impairments of anxiety and depression during the relevant period. It relied on the GP letter dated 4 February 2025, which recorded diagnoses of anxiety and depression since 4 October 2020 and described the condition as chronic, together with GP records referring to mixed anxiety and depressive disorder on 21 October 2021 and 8 November 2022. However, it found that ADHD was not proved: there had been no diagnosis, only a pre-assessment and a referral for specialist assessment and care.

On adverse effect, the tribunal accepted that anxiety and depression affected her normal day-to-day activities during the relevant period, particularly sleeping and eating. It found the claimant's evidence about effect was vague and imprecise, but placed more weight on what she wrote to her GP on 1 June 2023, including references to worsening health over the preceding months, almost daily difficulty sleeping, binge eating and purging, and ongoing long-term anxiety and depression with exacerbation. It concluded that these effects were more than minor or trivial.

The claim failed on the long-term condition. The tribunal found that the substantial adverse effects did not last for at least 12 months by the relevant period, because they only became substantial during that period. It also found that the evidence available at the end of the relevant period did not show that the substantial adverse effects were likely to last for at least 12 months or for life, or that they were likely to recur. The tribunal also rejected reliance on the deduced effect provisions. It therefore held that Ms Arora was not disabled during the relevant period and dismissed the disability discrimination claim.