Mr M Ollard, father For the v Respondent — 2022

At a preliminary hearing in Watford on 31 October 2022, Employment Judge George dealt with Mr N Ollard's claim against Boston Ltd. The tribunal recorded that the unfair dismissal claim had already been withdrawn at a preliminary hearing on 10 August 2022 because the claimant did not have sufficient qualifying service. The remaining live issue was a direct disability discrimination allegation that he had been dismissed because of a wrist injury, contrary to s.13 Equality Act 2010.

The respondent applied to strike out the disability claim under rule 37(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The tribunal referred to Anyanwu v South Bank University and accepted that strike out in discrimination cases should be used sparingly, but said it could be appropriate where a claim plainly had no reasonable prospect of success. It also referred to the disability definition in s.6 Equality Act 2010 and Schedule 1, and to All Answers Ltd v W and McDougall v Richmond Adult Community College on assessing whether an impairment was likely to last at least 12 months as at the date of the alleged discrimination.

Taking the case at its highest, the tribunal considered that there might be some evidence of substantial adverse effects at the date of dismissal, but it found it extremely unlikely that the claimant could show the wrist injury was long-term in the required sense. The fit note at page 79 suggested a short review period and possible improvement within four weeks, which the tribunal treated as evidence against the condition being likely to last for 12 months from the dismissal date. It also considered it even more unlikely that the respondent knew enough for knowledge of disability. The tribunal therefore concluded that the disability claim had no reasonable prospects of success and struck it out, and it did not need to consider the alternative deposit application.