In person For the v Respondent — 2018

Mr Daniel Gardner brought disability discrimination claims after Cambridgeshire Constabulary made a MASH referral concerning him and his family on 15 and 16 March 2018. The tribunal held the complaint fell within the work field for Equality Act jurisdiction and that the referral could amount to a detriment because it was made through the employment relationship and affected trust between the parties. It also found that, at the relevant time, he had PTSD as well as the conceded anxiety and depression, although that finding did not change the outcome of the substantive claims.

The tribunal found that CI Anderson made the referral because of genuine concerns about the claimant's deteriorating mental health and the welfare of his family, not because of disability itself. It accepted evidence of self-harm, suicidal ideation, violent thoughts, increasing medication, and concern about the children, and it rejected the claimant's case that the referral was motivated by promotion, cover-up, or a desire to manage him out. M was not treated as a proper comparator for direct discrimination, and the tribunal held that a hypothetical comparator presenting in the same way, but without the disability, would not have been treated differently.

The direct disability discrimination claim therefore failed. The discrimination arising from disability claim also failed because the tribunal held that the referral and its contents were not unfavourable treatment: they were an accurate summary of concerns and a step to begin the safeguarding process, which the tribunal found beneficial to the claimant and his family. If the treatment had been unfavourable, the tribunal held it would in any event have been justified as a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aim of protecting the claimant's and his family's health, safety and welfare.

The claims of indirect disability discrimination and victimisation were dismissed upon withdrawal. No monetary award was made.