Case 2602509/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S. Short v Maximus UK Services Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2602509/2019
- Decision date
- 17 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rachel Broughton
- Venue
- Nottingham
- Panel members
- Ms Andrews, Mrs Higgins
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S. Short
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, a nurse undertaking training as a functional assessor, had polycystic kidney disease. The respondent conceded disability. The tribunal found the respondent, through occupational health, had knowledge of the disability from 12 February 2019, and that the claimant's manager had actual or constructive knowledge by 25 March 2019. The tribunal found that the claimant's disability led to hospital appointments, fatigue, illness-related absence, and later stress and anxiety connected with being told she would need a kidney transplant.
The claimant did not complete Stage 3 of the training to the required standard and was dismissed on 12 April 2019. The tribunal found that her performance was significantly influenced by matters arising from her disability, including the interruption caused by disability-related hospital attendances and absences and the impact of fatigue, stress and anxiety. It rejected the respondent's case that the extension already given offset those effects, finding that she had not been given a full second Stage 3 period.
For the section 15 claim, the tribunal accepted the respondent's aims of meeting its contractual obligations to DWP and its duty of care to customers as legitimate, but found dismissal was not proportionate. It found less discriminatory measures were available, including giving more time and support to complete Stage 3, and that the respondent had not shown those steps would create risk or difficulty.
For the reasonable adjustments claim, the tribunal found the training requirements placed the claimant at a substantial disadvantage compared with non-disabled trainees. It held that reasonable adjustments would have included discounting disability-related absences and extending Stage 3 to allow a full redo of that stage, which would have given the claimant a prospect of completing it.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments under sections 20 and 21 Equality Act 2010. The tribunal found the respondent applied PCPs concerning completion of the healthcare professional training programme, including Stage 3 timing and assessment requirements, and failed to make reasonable adjustments including discounting disability-related absences and extending Stage 3 training. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability under section 15 Equality Act 2010. The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed because of failure to complete Stage 3 to the required standard, and that her performance was significantly influenced by matters arising from her disability, including hospital attendances, absences, fatigue, stress and anxiety. The respondent did not show dismissal was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal separately stated that the dismissal was an act of discrimination under section 39(2)(c) Equality Act 2010 and that this claim was well founded and succeeded. | Upheld | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
23 references- section 15 Equality Act 2010
- sections 20 and 21 Equality Act 2010
- section 39(2)(c) Equality Act 2010
- section 136 Equality Act 2010
- EHRC Employment Code
- Basildon and Thurrock NHS Foundation Trust v Weerasinghe
- City of York Council v Grosset
- Pnaiser v NHS England
- Hall v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police
- Charlesworth v Dransfields Engineering Services Ltd
- Sheikholeslami v University of Edinburgh
- Igen Ltd v Wong
- Hardy and Hansons Plc v Lax
- Hensman v Ministry of Defence
- Department for Work and Pensions v Boyers
- Ali v Torrosian
- Dominique v Toll Global Forwarding Ltd
- Environment Agency v Rowan
- Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Alam
- Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust v Foster
- Noor v Foreign and Commonwealth Office
- Griffiths v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
- South Staffordshire and Shropshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v Billingsley
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.