Case 2601461/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Stevenson v Marks and Spencer plc — 2021
- Case reference
- 2601461/2020
- Decision date
- 15 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Britton
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Stevenson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe preliminary hearing was ordered to decide whether the claimant was a disabled person at the material time for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010. The impairment relied upon was depression. The tribunal considered the claimant's evidence, evidence from his partner, medical records, workplace material, and submissions on the statutory framework.
The tribunal accepted that the claimant's mental health had worsened and that the alternating shift pattern had affected his sleep, energy levels, and activities such as going to the gym. It found that the condition tipped into a more than minor or trivial impact around July or August 2019, when the claimant first consulted his GP and was prescribed Mirtazapine, though he did not continue taking it because of side effects.
The tribunal held that by the final material event, identified as dismissal on 10 March 2020, the condition had not lasted 12 months and had not been shown to be likely to last 12 months or more. It placed weight on the claimant being allowed to return to night shifts in February 2020 and being described as doing better afterwards. The claimant therefore had not proved that he was disabled at the material time.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | At an open preliminary hearing, the tribunal determined that the claimant was not a disabled person for the purposes of section 6 and schedule 1 of the Equality Act 2010 at the material time. The judgment records directions to be set out separately and does not expressly dismiss the substantive discrimination claim. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- section 6 Equality Act 2010
- schedule 1 Equality Act 2010
- s.212(1) Equality Act 2010
- Goodwin v Patent Office [1999] ICR 302 EAT
- Richmond Adult Community College v McDougal [2008] ICR 431 CA
- SCA Packaging Ltd v Boyle [2009] ICR 1056
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.