Mr D. Opoka v Amazon Logistics UK Services Ltd and 1 other — 2020

The hearing on 10 December 2020 dealt with preliminary issues in a claim presented on 12 August 2019. The tribunal refused the claimant's application to stay the proceedings pending judicial review and appeals, noting that earlier challenges to prior case-management decisions had been rejected and that further delay would be contrary to the overriding objective.

On disability, the tribunal accepted that the claimant had a right ankle impairment arising from a 2011 fracture and later degenerative changes. It found that by July 2017 at the latest the impairment had more than minor or trivial adverse effects on his day-to-day activities, that those effects were long-term, and that he was disabled within s.6 EqA 2010 when he worked for Amazon. In the alternative, it held that the condition was progressive within paragraph 8 of Schedule 1 to the EqA, because further degeneration was likely and substantial adverse effects were likely to develop over time.

The tribunal struck out the constructive unfair dismissal claim because the claimant accepted that he did not have two years' continuous service. It also struck out the s.104 ERA automatically unfair dismissal claim because the pleaded case relied on a request to make reasonable adjustments for an impaired ankle, which is not a statutory right within s.104(4) ERA. The claimant's application to strike out the respondents' responses was refused, and the discrimination and victimisation claims were left to be determined at the final hearing because there were substantial factual disputes, including knowledge, PCPs, disadvantage, reasonable adjustments, protected acts, detriments, and causation.