Mr H Mansfield v Shakespeare Lodge TLA Limited — 2020

This was a preliminary hearing to decide whether Mr Mansfield was disabled at the material time for his disability discrimination claim. He alleged anxiety, depression, sciatica and back pain, and later PTSD was mentioned at the earlier case-management stage. The tribunal accepted that Dr Hopkinson’s GP report referred to depression and back pain, but it criticised the report for brevity and for appearing to repeat what Mr Mansfield had told the doctor rather than setting out an independent clinical basis.

Employment Judge M Warren found that Mr Mansfield had back pain and recently diagnosed depression, and that those impairments were likely to affect day-to-day activities to some extent. However, the tribunal was not satisfied that the effect was substantial, or that it was long-term at the relevant date. It noted the absence of detailed evidence about the actual impact on day-to-day activities, the lack of oral evidence from Mr Mansfield because he did not attend the remote hearing, and the absence of medical evidence supporting PTSD or any progressive condition. The tribunal therefore held that he was not a disabled person within section 6 of the Equality Act 2010.

On that basis, the complaints of disability discrimination were dismissed. The tribunal refused the respondent’s costs application, finding that Mr Mansfield’s non-attendance and attempt to advance a disability claim were not unreasonable, even though the evidence did not meet the balance of probabilities threshold. The judgment also records that the claims for automatic unfair dismissal, failure to provide written terms and conditions, and unpaid wages or breach of contract in relation to pension contributions survived to be heard at a later final hearing.