Miss Clare Jayne Fox v Blaby District Council and 1 other — 2020

Miss Fox had been employed by Blaby District Council since 2002. After a back injury in January 2017, later diagnosed as a fractured spine, the disability relied on for the proceedings was osteoporosis. The tribunal found the Council knew or ought reasonably to have known of the disability by 9 May 2017, when occupational health indicated that she was likely to fall within the Equality Act 2010. It held that the pleaded matters were discrete complaints rather than a continuing act, but extended time just and equitably for the out-of-time allegations because the delay was not extensive, the evidence was not materially prejudiced, and the Claimant would otherwise lose the chance to have the issues determined.

The tribunal dismissed direct disability discrimination against both Respondents. It found that the Claimant was accepted as disabled and that the Respondent had made adjustments, including a phased return and home working. However, it also found that after her disability-related absence a number of her former duties were allocated to Miss Price or others from time to time, including purchasing goods, raising invoices, ordering goods, and dealing with trade waste and clinical waste matters. That reduction in duties was unfavourable treatment arising from disability-related absence, and the tribunal was not satisfied that the Respondent had shown that it was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

On harassment, the tribunal found that comments that the Claimant was 'skiving' while working from home were made by Mr Nicholas Warren and Mr Murray Warburton. It held that those remarks were related to her working from home because of disability and satisfied the section 26 test. The remaining harassment allegations were dismissed, including the allegation that Miss Price called the Claimant 'Luke's pet', which the tribunal treated as banter and not harassment. Other allegations against Miss Price were rejected for lack of evidence or because the tribunal found they were explained by the breakdown in working relations rather than disability. Remedy was adjourned to a later hearing.