Miss C. Munro v Hot Tub Assist Ltd — 2021

Miss C. Munro was employed by Hot Tub Assist Ltd from 29 August 2019 to 20 May 2020 as delivery co-ordinator and administrator. The respondent accepted that she was disabled by epilepsy and knew of that condition throughout her employment. Her unfair dismissal complaint had already been struck out because she lacked the two-year qualifying service, and her wages claim was later recorded as dismissed upon withdrawal.

On the merits of the disability discrimination complaints, the tribunal found no prima facie case of direct discrimination. It accepted that the claimant was dismissed, but held there was nothing in the evidence to link the redundancy decision to her epilepsy or to show that she was treated less favourably because of that condition. The tribunal accepted the respondent's evidence that the business had been severely affected by the Covid-19 pandemic, that it reorganised for efficiency and economy, and that the claimant's duties could be covered by Ms Martin and Mr Ovens.

The tribunal also dismissed the s.15 claim. It found that the claimant's request to work from home on 18 March 2020 was made to protect or shield her father, whom she visited regularly, rather than because of epilepsy. Even if stress played a part in her absence from work on 19, 20 and 23 March 2020, the tribunal found no medical or other evidence linking that stress to her disability, and held that it was not the reason for her dismissal. The redundancy decision was instead found to flow from the respondent's reorganisation in response to the pandemic and uncertainty about its future business.

The reasonable adjustments complaint under ss.20 and 21 also failed. The tribunal held that the respondent had not been told of any medical reason for the home-working request, that there was no evidence of any increased risk of seizures or other disadvantage arising from epilepsy, and that the office-working requirement lasted only a short period before furlough and lockdown removed the issue in practice. The tribunal noted a potential time-limit issue for that allegation but said it would have been inclined to extend time on a just and equitable basis; that did not alter the outcome. All disability discrimination complaints were dismissed.