Mrs L Wild v London Borough of Newham — 2019

The claimant had been absent from work because of continuing back, leg and foot pain following surgery, and the respondent accepted that she was disabled at the relevant times. The tribunal dismissed the direct disability discrimination complaint because there was no evidence about the treatment of a real or hypothetical comparator, and the complaint was effectively abandoned in closing submissions.

The tribunal found that the claimant was presented with only two practical options: seeking a redundancy termination through voluntary release, or proceeding to a stage 3 sickness absence meeting with a significant risk of dismissal. It found that this excluded consideration of medical redeployment, although the respondent's sickness absence and disability procedures envisaged that possibility. The tribunal held that the treatment was unfavourable and arose from the claimant's inability to return to her existing role because of her disability, and that it was not justified.

For the reasonable adjustments complaint, the tribunal found that the respondent should have explored alternative roles through medical redeployment. It noted that the respondent was a substantial employer, that there were roles involving a mix of sitting, standing and walking, and that medical evidence indicated at least a possibility that the claimant could return to work in some capacity. The tribunal also upheld the claimant's consequential loss claim, finding that the delayed payment of her notice and redundancy sums caused direct and foreseeable loss of £1,776 in solicitors' costs.