Mr J Anderson of Counsel For the v Respondent — 2017

At a public preliminary hearing on 1 November 2017, Employment Judge Johnson sitting alone considered whether Mr A Wood was a disabled person within section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 at the material times. The respondent accepted that, from 24 August 2015, he had a mental impairment identified as post traumatic stress disorder with a substantial and long-term adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities, but argued that the claim still failed because the condition relied on in the case fell within the excluded category of a "tendency to steal" under the Disability Regulations and the 2011 Guidance.

The tribunal accepted the respondent’s submission that the claimant’s conduct at Boots on 24 August 2015 was dishonest when judged by the objective standards of ordinary, reasonable and honest people. The judge took into account the claimant placing the items in his own bag, leaving the store without paying, removing his identification lanyard, giving an untrue account of his occupation, signing the police notebook entry, and failing to report the incident to the respondent or the police. The judge also noted that the withdrawal of police vetting, suspension, disciplinary hearing and dismissal followed from the fixed penalty notice arising from that incident.

On causation, the tribunal held that the alleged discrimination arose from an excluded condition rather than from a protected disability. It found that the claimant’s PTSD manifested itself in what the tribunal described as a tendency to steal, which was excluded by regulation 4 and paragraph A13 of the 2011 Guidance. The complaint of unlawful disability discrimination was therefore dismissed. The claimant’s application for costs arising from the private preliminary hearing was also dismissed.