Miss U Choudhury v Innovative Technology Limited — 2024

This was a preliminary issue hearing to decide whether Miss U Choudhury was a disabled person for the purposes of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. She relied on traumatic brain injury and/or dyslexia. The respondent did not concede disability and said it did not have knowledge of any disability until the claimant raised it on appeal against dismissal.

The tribunal set out the statutory test in section 6 and Schedule 1 of the Equality Act 2010, referred to the definition of long-term effects, and noted that “likely” means “could well happen” from SCA Packaging Ltd v EHRC. It also applied the sequential approach from Goodwin v Patent Office and treated J v DLA as guidance. The tribunal concluded that the medical material did not show a diagnosed traumatic brain injury or any continuing mental impairment at the relevant time, and that there was no evidence of a substantial adverse effect on day-to-day activities.

The tribunal found that the claimant had not shown any effect on day-to-day life at the material time. It accepted evidence that she lived independently in Manchester, cooked for herself, travelled independently to India and Europe, and had no difficulty with social interaction. The work difficulties raised by managers concerned a highly specialised role and were not treated as normal day-to-day activities, save for a complaint that she talked loudly or over colleagues.

On that basis, the tribunal held that the claimant had not discharged the burden of proving that she was disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010. The disability discrimination claim was dismissed, and the final hearing listed for 31 March to 4 April 2025 was cancelled.