Mrs Carol Malone v Represented by:15 Ms R Wallace, Representative Communityfirstuk.com — 2023

At preliminary hearings on 1 September and 6 November 2023, Employment Judge Hendry heard evidence from Mrs Carol Malone and her husband about a long-standing anxiety condition. The respondent relied on Ms Pauline Lockhart's evidence and submitted that the difficulties were transient work-related stress or stress arising from life events; the claimant relied on medical records showing Citalopram prescriptions from December 2015 onwards and evidence of coping strategies she had used since her teenage years.

Applying section 6 of the Equality Act 2010, the Schedule 1 long-term requirement, and the "more than minor or trivial" threshold in section 212(1), the tribunal accepted that the claimant had a mental impairment consisting of anxiety. It found the condition had existed since her teenage years, had periodic flare-ups, and caused disabling panic attacks and anxiety in new situations, with unfamiliar places, and in the presence of conflict or disagreement.

The tribunal accepted that short gaps in medication did not undermine the overall picture, noting that some gaps were caused by pharmacy difficulties and that at one stage the dosage was reduced by agreement with the GP when the claimant felt better. Taking the evidence as a whole, it concluded that the underlying condition was long-term and had a substantial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities, so Mrs Malone was a disabled person throughout her employment with the respondent.

The judgment did not decide the substantive disability discrimination claims or any remedy. It recorded that the case would proceed to a further preliminary hearing for case management, and it noted that employer knowledge was not part of the hearing, although the tribunal observed that constructive knowledge could become an issue if the discrimination claims proceed.