Mr Jasvinder Kang v British Airways plc — 2024

The preliminary hearing was concerned with whether the claimant was disabled within the meaning of section 6 Equality Act 2010. The claimant relied on cardiomyopathy. The respondent accepted that this was a physical impairment and the tribunal found that the condition was long term and existed during the relevant period of the alleged discrimination, identified as 31 December 2021 to 30 September 2022.

The tribunal found that the claimant had not shown that cardiomyopathy had a substantial adverse effect on his ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities during the relevant period. It accepted medical evidence indicating that he was stable, asymptomatic, and not impaired day to day at points in 2022, and found that restrictions on gym use and tennis were attributable to knee problems rather than cardiomyopathy. It also found that later stress-related absence and driving difficulties were connected with the workplace incident on 30 September 2022 and stress, rather than established cardiomyopathy symptoms affecting normal day-to-day activities.

The tribunal also considered the claimant's argument about deduced effects of medication. It found that the medical evidence did not establish the symptoms, severity, regularity, or likely impact that would have occurred without medication at the relevant time. As the claimant had not proved a substantial adverse effect, the tribunal concluded that the effects were not long term for the statutory test, found that he was not disabled under section 6 Equality Act 2010, and dismissed the disability claims for want of jurisdiction.