Mr Looi, Husband For the v Respondent — 2019

This was a preliminary hearing to decide whether the Claimant met the definition of disability under section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. The Tribunal heard from the Claimant, the Claimant’s line manager, and medical evidence including GP and Occupational Health material. It identified the statutory questions as whether there was a mental or physical impairment, whether it affected normal day-to-day activities, whether the effect was substantial, and whether it was long term.

The Tribunal accepted that the Claimant had a mental impairment, but it did not accept that the impairment had a substantial adverse effect on her normal day-to-day activities. It noted that she continued in her role as a Quality Control Analyst from February 2016 until dismissal in January 2018, and that she attended work throughout a long period. The Tribunal considered that if her ability to carry out day-to-day activities had been impaired to the extent claimed, it would have expected a greater impact on her ability to attend and work on a daily basis.

The Tribunal also found that the periods of stress and anxiety appeared to coincide with significant work events, including the original dismissal, the performance improvement process, and the disciplinary process, rather than showing a sustained long-term effect. It noted that the Claimant did not seek GP help during much of the intervening period and that the medical evidence described the condition as, at best, a mild depressive illness. The Occupational Health evidence was also relied on as indicating that she was fit for work and that long-term consequences were not expected.

On that basis, the Tribunal held that the Claimant was not a disabled person within the meaning of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. Her claims against the Respondent were therefore dismissed at the preliminary hearing, and no remedy was awarded.