Case 2602225/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Ghumra v Leicester City Council — 2020
- Case reference
- 2602225/2019
- Decision date
- 5 May 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Faulkner
- Venue
- Leicester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Ghumra
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe preliminary hearing determined whether the claimant was a disabled person within section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 at the relevant times: his dismissal on 21 May 2019 and the unsuccessful appeal on 6 January 2020. The claimant relied on musculoskeletal issues, anxiety and depression, and PTSD arising after a serious car accident in September 2018. The tribunal allowed an agreed amendment concerning the appeal decision, but the only substantive issue at this hearing was disability status.
For the musculoskeletal issues, the tribunal accepted on limited evidence that the claimant had an impairment described as a burning sensation from hips to ankles, but found insufficient evidence that it had a more than minor or trivial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities. The tribunal did not treat the claimant's knee problems as part of the pleaded musculoskeletal impairment and found that evidence about medication did not alter the analysis.
For anxiety, depression and PTSD, the tribunal accepted that there was some evidence of mental impairment, particularly symptoms of severe anxiety and moderate depression in April 2019 and a brief GP reference to PTSD. However, it found the evidence did not establish a substantial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities, including social interaction, driving, sport or working on property, nor did it establish the required long-term effect. Considering all impairments cumulatively, the claimant had not proved disability at either relevant date, so the disability discrimination complaints were dismissed. The unfair dismissal complaint remained unaffected and was to proceed separately.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Complaints of direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, and failure to make reasonable adjustments were dismissed at a preliminary hearing because the claimant was found not to be disabled within section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 at the relevant times. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
12 references- section 6 Equality Act 2010
- Schedule 1 Equality Act 2010
- section 212 Equality Act 2010
- Kapadia v London Borough of Lambeth
- Goodwin v Patent Office
- J v DLA Piper UK LLP
- SCA Packaging v Boyle
- Lamb v The Garrard Academy
- Fathers v Pets At Home Ltd
- McDougall v Richmond Adult Community College
- Tesco Stores Limited v Tennant
- Royal Bank of Scotland PLC v Morris
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.