Case 2305775/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M. Giltinane v Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust — 2023
- Case reference
- 2305775/2021
- Decision date
- 22 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge A. Beale Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms M. Giltinane
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis reserved judgment was confined to the issue of disability. Employment Judge A. Beale found that Ms M. Giltinane was a disabled person within the meaning of section 6 Equality Act 2010 by reason of ADHD throughout her employment with Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust, from 17 August 2020 to 15 January 2022. The tribunal accepted that ADHD was a lifelong condition and that the relevant period for the disability issue ran at least through her employment, whether it ended on her resignation date of 18 October 2021 or on expiry of notice on 15 January 2022.
The tribunal did not find, on the balance of probabilities, a separately diagnosed impairment of depression or anxiety during the relevant period, although it said that point was not material to the overall disability analysis because the symptoms experienced by the claimant had to be considered in the round. It relied on the medical evidence, including Dr Kripalani's letters and the Practitioner Health Programme notes, which described persistent problems with focus and attention, distractibility, procrastination, disorganisation, anxiety, checking behaviour, and difficulty dealing with paperwork and multiple tasks. The tribunal found those effects were more than minor or trivial and affected normal day-to-day activities such as reading and following instructions, completing forms, managing bills and insurance, driving, and coping with noise and distractions.
On long-term effect, the tribunal held that the substantial adverse effect had been present on a fluctuating basis throughout the claimant's life and throughout her employment. It found that any improvement after medication in July 2021 did not prevent the long-term requirement being satisfied, because the symptoms would likely have continued without treatment and were likely to recur. No monetary remedy was determined in this judgment, and no award was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Reserved judgment on the preliminary issue of disability only. The tribunal found the claimant was disabled within s.6 Equality Act 2010 by reason of ADHD throughout her employment, but this judgment did not determine substantive liability or any remedy. | Upheld | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
13 references- s.6 Equality Act 2010
- Equality Act 2010 Schedule 1 paragraph 2
- Equality Act 2010 Schedule 1 paragraph 5
- Boyle v SCA Packaging Ltd
- All Answers Ltd v Mr W
- McDougall v Richmond Adult Community College
- Fathers v Pets at Home Ltd
- Aderemi v London and South Eastern Railway Ltd
- Chacón Navas v Eurest Colectividades SA
- HK Danmark, acting on behalf of Ring v Dansk almennyttigt Boligselskab
- Banaszczyk v Booker Ltd
- Paterson v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
- J C v Gordonstoun Schools Ltd
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.