Mr J Kilday v Represented by: A Callan - Solicitor LRQA Group Limited — 2026

The tribunal determined a preliminary issue in a contested disability discrimination claim: whether Mr J Kilday was a disabled person under section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 during the agreed relevant period of 26 February 2024 to 12 June 2024. None of the elements of the statutory definition was conceded. The claimant gave evidence, there were no respondent witnesses, and the tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence as an honest account of events as he remembered them.

The tribunal found that the claimant had suffered from depression and anxiety since approximately 2004, had been prescribed antidepressants consistently since 2004 or 2005, and had experienced periods involving low mood, demotivation, social withdrawal, suicidal ideation and difficulty coping. It found that in 2023 and 2024 his symptoms deteriorated, including difficulty leaving the house without his wife or son, nausea and panic at the thought of leaving home, becoming overwhelmed in a shopping centre, needing prompting to wash and eat, and OCD-like behaviours when outside.

Applying the statutory definition and the authorities it cited, the tribunal found that the claimant's ability to leave the house, socialise, shower, and prepare and eat food was adversely affected during the relevant period, and that the effect was substantial because it was more than minor or trivial. It further found that the substantial adverse effect was long term, taking account of the recurring and continuing nature of his depression and anxiety, his long-term use of antidepressants, and the substantial effect on his ability to socialise and leave the house before 2023 and 2024.

The respondent argued that the symptoms during the relevant period were a response to workplace events rather than a mental impairment. The tribunal did not accept that submission. It found that the claimant was suffering from the mental impairments of depression and anxiety at the relevant time, that the symptoms were consistent with his historical depression and anxiety, and that the occupational health report in January 2024 recorded clinical symptoms of severe anxiety and severe depression. The only outcome recorded was that the claimant was a disabled person by virtue of depression and anxiety; the judgment expressly stated that its findings related only to disability status and did not bind a future tribunal on the merits or issues such as the respondent's knowledge.