In person For v Amanda Glover, Solicitor — 2022

This was a reserved judgment at a preliminary hearing on whether the claimant was a disabled person for Equality Act purposes. The tribunal recorded that the claimant had not complied fully with orders to provide an impact statement and medical evidence, and that no medical records were produced. The claimant was employed as an Automotive Glazing Technician, and his disability discrimination complaint arose from mask-wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic.

On asthma, the tribunal accepted that the claimant had the condition since birth and that it was a physical impairment with long-term effects. However, it found that, with medication, the asthma did not have a substantial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities. The tribunal described the symptoms as mild and short-lived shortness of breath that the claimant resolved by using his inhaler, and it was not satisfied that the claimant had shown any substantial effect on day-to-day activities either with medication or on the deduced-effects basis under paragraph 5 of Schedule 1 to the Equality Act 2010.

On mental health, the tribunal accepted that the claimant experienced stress, anxiety, and depression, and that some aspects of his life were affected. It nevertheless found that the effect was not substantial, and that the case fell within the line of authority in J v DLA Piper and Herry v Dudley Metropolitan Council because what he experienced was a reaction to difficulties at work rather than a mental impairment. The tribunal also found no cumulative effect between the asthma and mental health conditions. It concluded that the claimant was not disabled at the material time and dismissed the disability discrimination claims.