Ms. Claire Ainsworth v The Chief Constable of South Wales Police Heard : by Cloud Video Platform — 2025

This was a preliminary hearing to decide whether Ms Claire Ainsworth was a disabled person for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010 at the material time in her disability discrimination claim against the Chief Constable of South Wales Police. The tribunal heard oral evidence from the claimant, reviewed selected bundle documents, and applied the statutory definition in section 6 and Schedule 1, including the concepts of physical or mental impairment, substantial effect, and long-term effect.

The tribunal accepted that the claimant had the mental impairment of anxiety throughout the relevant period. It also accepted that she experienced anxiety-related symptoms during that period, including stress, suicidal thoughts, brain fog and fuzzy brain, but it did not accept that all of those symptoms were shown to be caused by the impairment or to amount to a substantial adverse effect. It found no sufficient evidence that tiredness, difficulty getting out of bed, fuzzy brain, nightmares or suicidal thoughts, taken alone, established disability status on the evidence before it.

The tribunal did find that brain fog caused a substantial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities. It accepted that the claimant had difficulty processing information, sometimes froze while working, completed fewer tasks in a 12-hour shift than she had previously done, and struggled with ordinary decisions such as shopping for and preparing food. It rejected the respondent's submission that those effects were merely reactions to life events and found that the brain fog was a mental impairment that caused the relevant substantial effects.

On long-term effect, the tribunal found that the substantial adverse effect began in July 2022 and continued until March 2025, so it had lasted at least 12 months. The formal judgment records that Ms Ainsworth was a disabled person between July 2022 and 31 January 2025, and not a disabled person for any relevant period before July 2022. The case was directed to proceed to final hearing in accordance with separate case management orders.