Ms E Borland, Friend For the v Respondent — 2024

At the preliminary hearing in Norwich on 23 July 2024, Employment Judge Postle considered whether the claimant was disabled within s.6 Equality Act 2010 and the respondent's strike-out application. The claimant relied on a back/spinal injury and later depression and stress; the respondent accepted she had a long-term physical impairment and knew about it, but disputed that it had a substantial adverse effect on day-to-day activities.

The tribunal found the claimant had not shown a substantial adverse effect at the material time. It relied on evidence that she moved around the store freely, sometimes danced at work and at social events, and there was no contemporaneous medical evidence that stress, anxiety or depression affected her during the period complained of. The tribunal therefore held that she was not disabled for Equality Act purposes and dismissed all disability discrimination claims, including direct discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, reasonable adjustments, harassment and victimisation.

The age discrimination complaint based on an alleged April 2022 comment by Gordon Currie was dismissed as out of time under s.123 Equality Act 2010 and the tribunal declined to extend time on just and equitable grounds. The public interest disclosure allegation about staff being bought takeaway food and resulting detriments was held not to amount to a qualifying disclosure, and the constructive dismissal claim based on the restructure and move into Sales was dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success.