Miss Chloe Bage v Valuation Office Agency — 2021

This was a preliminary hearing to decide whether Miss Chloe Bage was a disabled person for the purposes of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 at the material times between 15 June 2019 and 4 February 2020. The tribunal applied the four-stage approach in J v DLA Piper and Goodwin v Patent Office, and referred to the authorities on impairment, substantial effect and long-term effect, including MOD v Hay, Aderemi, SCA Packaging v Boyle and McDougall v Richmond Adult Community College. It focused on the relevant period and did not take into account evidence that post-dated it.

The tribunal accepted that the claimant had a lifelong physical condition affecting her joints, with pain, stiffness, fatigue and exhaustion, and that she had longstanding contact with mental health services and was prescribed lamotrigine from September 2018. It also accepted evidence of PMS-type symptoms and occupational health material from November 2019 recording fatigue, anxiety and generalised pain, while noting there was no expert diagnosis of hypermobility syndrome, PMS or anxiety and depression and that some parts of the claimant's evidence were not wholly consistent.

The tribunal held that the combined effects of pain, fatigue, exhaustion and anxiety amounted to an impairment with a substantial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities, that the effect had existed for many years before employment began, and that it was long-term and likely to recur. It therefore found that the claimant was disabled at all material times and the case was to proceed to a final hearing; no merits findings or remedy were determined in this judgment.