M Kearns Members: Mrs FS Paton Mr AB Grant Mr T Charity v Walker Love — 2017

The claimant was employed as a customer service adviser and the tribunal found that he was disabled by reason of mild hereditary spherocytosis. It found that the respondent knew or ought reasonably to have known of the condition from the interview process, the employee profile, the 6 March 2015 return-to-work meeting, the 7 July 2015 discussion, and the claimant's 20 July 2015 request to move to part-time hours.

The section 13 direct discrimination claim was dismissed. Although the tribunal preferred the claimant's account of the 6 March 2015 meeting and accepted that he was told he had been given a final chance after sickness absence, it found that this treatment was because he had been absent, not because of his disability. The further complaints relied on in relation to bereavement leave and the July 2015 disciplinary incident did not establish less favourable treatment because of disability.

The reasonable adjustments claim under sections 20 and 21 succeeded only in part. The tribunal held there was no separate duty merely to investigate the impairment or seek medical advice. It also rejected a wider adjustment of disregarding disability-related absence when applying the respondent's attendance practice, because on the evidence that would not have been likely to remove the disadvantage or was not shown to be practicable. However, it found that the respondent should have implemented the agreed reduction from 40 to 24 hours per week before dismissal, because that step was reasonable, practicable, and had a real prospect of reducing the claimant's fatigue-related disadvantage.

The section 15 claim for discrimination arising from disability succeeded. The tribunal found that the dismissal on 1 September 2015 was prompted by disability-related absence, and that although maintaining attendance was a legitimate aim, dismissal was not proportionate because the reduced-hours adjustment should have been tried before resorting to termination. Remedy was assessed on the basis that, had the reasonable adjustment been made, the claimant would have remained employed until the start of his college course in September 2016. The tribunal awarded £6,492.62 for financial loss, £1,600 for injury to feelings, and £864.63 interest, making a total of £8,957.25, stated in the judgment as £8,957 when rounded to the nearest whole pound. The award was not apportioned between the two successful discrimination claims.