In person For the v Ms A Kent, Solicitor — 2020

This was a preliminary issue hearing on whether Mr C Jolly was a disabled person within section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. Employment Judge Tynan, sitting alone in Cambridge, recorded that the claim form had advanced complaints of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination, but the only issue determined in this judgment was disability status.

The tribunal accepted the claimant's account and the medical records showing repeated treatment for depression over a number of years, including GP consultations in 2011, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2018 and July 2019. It noted prescriptions for Fluoxatine, Citalopram, Mirtazapine and Sertraline, referral to a wellbeing service, and the July 2019 assessment diagnosing depression. It found the claimant's depression had substantial adverse effects on normal day-to-day activities and that those effects were long term, either because they had lasted for more than 12 months or because the condition was likely to recur.

The tribunal also considered evidence about dyspraxia, including a letter from Dr Geoff Isaacs suggesting symptoms consistent with dyspraxia or ADHD, but said depression alone was sufficient to satisfy section 6. It applied the statutory definition of disability, the long-term effects provisions in Schedule 1, the statutory guidance on disability including cumulative effects, Morgan v Staffordshire University, and J v DLA Piper UK LLP. The tribunal declared that the claimant was a disabled person within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010 at the relevant times. No remedy was awarded and the substantive unfair dismissal and discrimination claims were not decided in this judgment.