Case 8000056/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Loading page content.
TopCase 8000056/2022 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 8000056/2022 Held at Edinburgh on April 2023 Employment Judge W A Meiklejohn Mr C Thacker
This was an open preliminary hearing on 21 April 2023 before Employment Judge W A Meiklejohn to decide whether Mr C Thacker was disabled, for the purposes of his complaints covering 1 November 2021 to 30 June 2022, by reason of dyslexia. The tribunal heard oral evidence from the claimant, considered his impact statement and medical assessment material, and noted witness statements from the respondent's witnesses, but gave those statements limited evidential weight because they were not tested in cross-examination and went more to the respondent's knowledge than to the statutory disability question.
The tribunal accepted that the claimant had a mental impairment in the form of dyslexia, relying on Dr A Archbold's July 2010 diagnostic report and the claimant's own evidence that the report accurately described how he was affected. It found that the dyslexia had adverse effects on reading, spelling, writing, structuring written work, short-term memory, and aspects of cognitive functioning. Applying the statutory meaning of "substantial" as more than minor or trivial, the tribunal held that those effects were substantial and long-term, given that they had been present since school days and had been formally diagnosed in 2010.
The main disputed issue was whether the effects were on normal day-to-day activities. The tribunal held that reading, writing, spelling and short-term memory were normal day-to-day activities within the Equality Act guidance, and it treated the claimant's use of Dragon dictation software, spellcheck and a mobile phone app as "measures" or "other aid" for the purposes of Schedule 1 paragraph 5. The effect therefore had to be assessed without those measures in place. On that basis, the tribunal found that, but for those aids, the claimant would have difficulty writing reports, spelling words correctly, reading, and using short-term memory effectively.
The tribunal concluded that Mr Thacker was disabled within the meaning of section 6(1) Equality Act 2010 because of his dyslexia. The judgment did not determine the substantive discrimination or unfair dismissal claims; it decided only the preliminary disability issue and directed that the matter could proceed to the final hearing already listed.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Open preliminary hearing only. The tribunal determined that, for the purposes of the claimant's complaints between 1 November 2021 and 30 June 2022, he was disabled within the meaning of section 6(1) Equality Act 2010 because of dyslexia, so the claim could proceed to a final hearing. | Upheld | Disability | — |
The 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.
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.