Case 4103088/2022 · Employment Tribunal
E.T. Z (WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4103088/2022 (V)5 Held at Aberdeen on November 2022 Employment Judge N M Hosie Mr D Gibbs v Bristow Helicopters Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 4103088/2022
- Decision date
- 29 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Venue
- Aberdeen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
E.T. Z (WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4103088/2022 (V)5 Held at Aberdeen on November 2022 Employment Judge N M Hosie Mr D Gibbs
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 8 November 2022, Mr D Gibbs pursued complaints including disability discrimination against Bristow Helicopters Limited. The tribunal considered only disability status and time-bar in relation to the discrimination complaints. Mr Gibbs said the respondent had failed to make reasonable adjustments, including by refusing a move to the Lee-On-Solent base after a November 2020 request and by not posting him there as a temporary "floater pilot" in 2022.
The tribunal accepted that Mr Gibbs suffered from anxiety and depression during two distinct periods, from about February to July 2020 and from about March to July 2021, and that these conditions had a substantial adverse effect on day-to-day activities during those periods. It relied on the medical evidence, including reports from Dr Moghul, Dr Peter Smith and Dr Robin Love, but found that the effects were not long-term within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010 because neither period lasted 12 months and there was no evidence of an underlying condition likely to recur beyond that period.
On that basis, the tribunal found that Mr Gibbs was not a disabled person under s.6 Equality Act 2010 at the relevant times of the alleged discrimination. The disability discrimination claim was therefore dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The tribunal also said that, had disability been established, the claim would have been time-barred: the first alleged failure ended on 16 December 2020, the second on 14 February 2022, ACAS was notified on 19 May 2022, and it would not have been just and equitable to extend time.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary hearing on disability status and time-bar only. The tribunal found Mr Gibbs was not a disabled person within s.6 Equality Act 2010 at the relevant times of the alleged failures to make reasonable adjustments, and dismissed the discrimination claim for want of jurisdiction. It also said the complaints would have been out of time in any event. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.6 Equality Act 2010
- Schedule 1 paragraph 2(1) Equality Act 2010
- Goodwin v Patent Office
- Sullivan v Bury Street Capital Ltd
- Robertson v Bexley Community Centre
- just and equitable extension of time
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.