Mr S Gill v Limited (in Liquidation) — 2019

The claimant brought claims including unfair dismissal and discrimination on grounds of race and disability. This preliminary hearing addressed whether he was disabled for the purposes of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. The respondent accepted that the claimant had sciatica and that the condition was long term; the disputed issue was whether it had a substantial adverse effect on his ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.

The Tribunal found that the claimant could not sit or drive for more than about two to two and a half hours without experiencing sciatica-type pain, and that he could not stand for a period equivalent to the duration of a commercial concert without such pain. It treated his stretching exercises, recommended by his doctor, as treatment rather than a coping strategy, so assessed the effect of the impairment without those exercises.

Taking account of the statutory guidance and the meaning of a substantial effect as more than minor or trivial, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the limitations found amounted to a substantial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities. It therefore concluded that the claimant was not disabled within the meaning of section 6, with the result that the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to consider the disability discrimination claim.