EC directive on equal rights requires single parents to set off child care costs. A social security benefit designed to keep low income workers in employment or to encourage them into employment was within the scope of Directive 76/207/EC, not only as being directly related to access to employment, but also on the basis that … Continue reading Meyers v Adjudication Officer: ECJ 19 Jul 1995
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustments The Claimant had surgery for parotid cancer in 1998 and so was disabled under para 6A Disability Discrimination Act 1995. In 2009 he developed symptoms in his back which the treating physicians did not immediately link to the cancer. He died in 2011. The Respondent did not know, and … Continue reading Peregrine (Deceased) v Amazon.Co.Uk Ltd (Disability Discrimination : Reasonable Adjustments): EAT 20 Aug 2013
Iniquity surpasses legal advice privilege PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Disclosure PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Striking-out/dismissal An Employment Judge struck out paragraphs of the Claimant’s claim as they depended on an email in respect of which legal advice privilege was claimed. In considering whether privilege could not be claimed as the advice in the email was … Continue reading X v Y Ltd (Practice and Procedure – Disclosure): EAT 9 Aug 2018
The court was asked, whether asked to grant possession against a disabled tenant where the grounds for possession were mandatory. The defendant was a secure tenant with a history of psychiatric disability. He had set out to buy his flat, but the council sought possession when it discovered that he had sublet. Held: Section 23(3)(c) … Continue reading London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm and Disability Rights Commission: CA 25 Jul 2007
The court considered whether discriminatory acts after the termination of employment were caught by the respective anti-discrimination Acts. The acts included a failure to give proper references. They pursued claims on the basis of victimisation after their primary discrimination claims. Held: The 1975 and 1976 Acts were similarly phrased and the wording in the 1995 … Continue reading Relaxion Group plc v Rhys-Harper; D’Souza v London Borough of Lambeth; Jones v 3M Healthcare Limited and three other actions: HL 19 Jun 2003
The applicant complained that she was dismissed when her employers learned that she was pregnant. Held: 1(1) (a) and 5(3) of the 1975 Act were to be interpreted as meaning that where a woman had been engaged for an indefinite period, the fact that pregnancy was the reason for her temporary unavailability at a time … Continue reading Webb v EMO Air Cargo (UK) Ltd (No 2): HL 20 Oct 1995
The employee complained of his employer’s repeated failure to regrade him, and alleged discrimination. The employer said his claim was out of time. Held: Mummery J made the distinction between single acts of discrimination, and continuing discrimination: ‘the tribunal erred in law in failing to treat the acts complained of on regrading and failure to … Continue reading Owusu v London Fire and Civil Defence Authority: EAT 1 Mar 1995
The employer was to make 530 members of its staff redundant. Each staff member was assessed and scored. The claimants said that the method of selection was unfair, and sought disclosure of the scores of all employees. Held: It was wrong to order discovery of the forms of employees who had not been selected for … Continue reading British Aerospace plc v Green and Others: CA 18 Apr 1995
EAT Disability Discrimination : Disability Related DiscriminationThe Respondent employer appealed against the findings of the Employment Tribunal that the Claimant had been subject to disability related discrimination and harassment. The principal ground of appeal was that the ET failed to appreciate the full impact of London Borough of Lewisham (2008) on the need for a … Continue reading The Prince’s Trust v Donelan (Disability Discrimination : Disability Related Discrimination): EAT 14 Mar 2013
EAT Practice and Procedure : Costs – Tribunal orders that Appellant should pay Respondents one-third of their costs (estimated prior to assessment at andpound;260,000) on the basis that the claim was misconceived from the start.Held, dismissing the appeal, that there was no error of law in the Tribunal’s approach – In particular, it was not … Continue reading Vaughan v London Borough of Lewisham and Others (Practice and Procedure : Costs): EAT 6 Jun 2013
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustments
The Employment Tribunal found that the Respondent was under a duty to make reasonable adjustments to provide one to one counselling for the Claimant’s . .
The child was subject to the school eventually declined to clean and change him. The mother claimed that the school was discriminating.
Held: The mother had understated the frequency of the bowel accidents. The school was not properly equipped . .
IAT A person who cannot meet the requirements of the Immigration Rules is unlikely to be able to show that the decision was contrary to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (as amended) by reason of the . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – ‘Associative’ discrimination
The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 can be interpreted so as to apply to ‘associative’ discrimination as required by the decision of the . .
UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reasonableness of dismissal
Harassment (Disability Discrimination Act 1995, section 3B) and unfair dismissal. Appeal on grounds that Tribunal’s reasoning perverse . .
‘This appeal concerns the application of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 to the situation where an employer is considering dismissal, or ill health retirement, due to the incapacity of the employee resulting in his or her long-term absence . .
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
Disability related discrimination
Direct disability discrimination
An Employment Tribunal failed to focus on the wording of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 . .
How much detail an Employment Tribunal has to go into when determining what were the reasonable steps which an employer should have taken to perform its duty to a disabled person under section 6 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 . .
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustments
Tribunal in finding a failure to make reasonable adjustments under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 failed to follow the guidance set out in . .
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION: Reasonable adjustments
The Employment Tribunal erred in law in failing to properly apply s. 18B of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 to the evidence and to make the . .
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
Section 4A(1) and (3) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.
The Tribunal found that employer had failed to make a reasonable adjustment . .
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
Direct disability discrimination
Disability related discrimination
The Claimant, who was disabled within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, was . .
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
The EAT held that there were arguable errors in the ET’s approach to the factual questions raised by sections 5 and 6 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 before their . .
EAT The Claimant claimed that she was disabled within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. She claimed she was suffering from carpal tunnel syndrome, which was accepted. She also complained she . .
EAT The Employment Tribunal had erred in its construction of direct discrimination under s3A(5) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 as amended when it failed to construct a correct hypothetical comparator . .
EAT The Employment Tribunal was wrong to find that the Respondent had discriminated against the Claimant under Section 6(1) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 because it omitted to find what arrangements . .
EAT The appellant who was disabled was dismissed after a long absence from work. He made various claims under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, all of which were rejected. He contended that the failure to . .
Appeal by claimant against a decision on a preliminary point by an Employment Tribunal at which it was determined that the Appellant was a disabled person within the meaning of Section 1(1) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 in the period 23 . .
EAT Disability Discrimination: meaning of disability
The combination of Section 1 of, and Schedule 1 paragraph 8 to, of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 means that if the Appellant has a progressive . .
EAT The claimant appealed against the dismissal of his application both in respect of allegations of disability discrimination in terms of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and unfair dismissal. . .
Appeal about the scope of protection conferred by the 1995 Act on ‘contract workers’, workers who do work for the alleged discriminator, but not employed by him. They are employed by someone else and their services are contracted out. The case turns on the interpretation of section 12 of the 1995 Act which makes it … Continue reading Abbey Life Assurance Company Limited v Tansell: CA 6 Apr 2000
A tribunal considering a claim of disability discrimination should best consider the various statutory elements in the order given in the Act, so as to avoid confusion in unraveling what is a complex statutory structure. The wide language of section 6(2) and 6(3) is capable of applying to a ‘dismissal situation’. Although section 6 makes … Continue reading Morse v Wiltshire County Council: EAT 1 May 1998
An ability to carry out normal domestic day to day tasks did not mean that a physical impairment was not substantial. The word ‘substantial’ is potentially ambiguous. In that it might mean ‘very large’ or ‘more than minor or trivial’. The code of guidance resolves this ambiguity in favour of the latter alternative. The employment … Continue reading Goodwin v Patent Office: EAT 21 Oct 1998
The Tribunal was not wrong to find disability discrimination where an employee was selected for redundancy drawing inferences from events which had occurred before the Act came into force. No need in this law for comparison with treatment of comparitors. Citations: Gazette 03-Feb-1999,  IRLR 624 Statutes: Disability Discrimination Act 1995 Employment, Discrimination Updated: 18 … Continue reading British Sugar Plc v Kirker: EAT 3 Feb 1999
An airline pilot complained that he had been unfairly dismissed and the Industrial Tribunal, without considering whether or not they had jurisdiction to hear the complaint on the ground that the employee might ordinarily work abroad, found that the dismissal was unfair. The case had been listed before the Industrial Tribunal upon the jurisdictional question … Continue reading British Midland Airways Limited v Lewis: EAT 1978
Tribunals looking at Disability Discrimination should check the four factors in the Act without losing the overall picture. Assistance was available from the WHO Classification of Diseases. Being able to carry out a task did not mean ability was not impaired. ‘The tribunal should bear in mind that with social legislation of this kind, a … Continue reading Goodwin v Patent Office: EAT 3 Feb 1999
The employer appealed against a finding of disability discrimination. The tribunal was claimed not to have taken account of the codes of practice and the need for a risk assessment. Held: The absence of a risk assessment mean that no adjustment had been considered, and no justification was available. The finding was essentially under 5(1). … Continue reading Woodlands School (Newton Stewart) Ltd v Gordon: EAT 5 Oct 2001
Judges: Ward, M oore-Bick, Elias LJJ Citations:  EWCA Civ 648 Links: Bailii Statutes: Disability Discrimination Act 1995 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Discrimination Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.440221
Where a local authority raised the care charges for facilities and services provided to disabled people charging different rates according to the benefits received, and where some benefits were received according to the level of disability, that differentiation did not amount to disability discrimination. The differences arose form the different levels of benefits paid to … Continue reading Regina v Powys County Council, Ex Parte Hambidge (No 2): CA 16 Mar 2000
EAT Unfair dismissal and Race Relations Act 1976 Unfair dismissal – Exclusions including worker/jurisdiction Three cases were stayed pending the judgment of the House of Lords in Lawson v Serco  ICR 250. The appeal in the British Council case was dismissed on withdrawal after the hearing and before the judgment. In ADT, the Employment … Continue reading ADT Fire and Security Plc v Speyer: EAT 15 Sep 2006
The tenant was guilty of nuisance, but her misbehaviour was attributable to her psychotic state – her ‘disability’ within the 1995 Act. Held: Though a very pertinent factor to be taken into account may be a housing authority’s obligations to other tenants on a housing estate and the interests of those other tenants, though the … Continue reading North Devon Homes Housing Association v Brazier: QBD 2003
The claimant suffered asymptotic prostate cancer, but after a prostatectomy, had suffered urinary incontinence. He appealed a finding of the tribunal and EAT that his condition was not a disability within the Act. Held: The Schedule enlarged upon the definition of disability to give statutory protection to those with progressive conditions. The urinary incontinece was … Continue reading D H Kirton v Tetrosyl Limited: CA 10 Apr 2003
The Industrial Tribunal had held that the appellant’s dismissal was unfair but then decided that she had failed to mitigate her loss. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Tribunal announced its decision and stated that she was to get no compensatory award because of that failure. Her solicitor said nothing. When he received the … Continue reading Trimble v Supertravel Ltd: EAT 1982
A company took on employees through an employment agency. The contract of employment was between the agency and the worker who was supplied to the company by the agency. It was the company which had relationship of principal to the worker, and so was responsible for compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act. The absence of … Continue reading MHC Consulting Services Ltd v Tansell: CA 19 Apr 2000
The ability of a tribunal to revisit its own judgments, the review procedure, was only appropriate for use in exceptional circumstances. Citations:  IRLR 112 Cited by: Cited – Trimble v Supertravel Ltd EAT 1982 The Industrial Tribunal had held that the appellant’s dismissal was unfair but then decided that she had failed to mitigate … Continue reading D G Moncrieff (Farmers) v MacDonald: EAT 1978
A possession order had been obtained by the local authority, but the tenant later produced evidence that she was a diabetic dyslexic. Croydon did not at first enforce the possession order, until the arrears of rent began to increase again. The tenant applied for a stay of the warrant of execution. Held: The second application … Continue reading Wright v Croydon London Borough Council: 2007
The industrial tribunal had refused the applicant an extension of time. Held: The Tribunal mistook the law in holding that it could grant a review of its decision because the employee’s case had not been properly argued at the preliminary hearing as a result of her representative’s shortcomings. It would not be in the interests … Continue reading Lindsay v Ironsides Ray and Vials: EAT 27 Jan 1994
Both cases questioned the extent, as a disability, of functional or psychological ‘overlay’, where there may be no medical condition underlying the symptoms which the employee claims to be present. Neither claimant had asserted any psychological disability. The employees appealed a refusal that they be considered to suffer a disability. ‘Impairment’, has to mean some … Continue reading Rugamel v Sony Music Entertainment UK Ltd; McNicol v Balfour Beatty Rail Maintenance Ltd: EAT 28 Aug 2001
An employer dismissing an employee for sickness absences, and who was unaware that the sickness had come to be a disability, did not discriminate under the Act. The reason for the dismissal was to be looked for in the mind of the employer. Citations: Gazette 08-Jul-1998, Gazette 10-Jun-1998, Times 12-Mar-1998,  IRLR 233 Statutes: Disability … Continue reading O’Neill v Symm and Co Ltd: EAT 10 Jun 1998
Miss Cox claimed that the Council had not made a proper adjustment so as to allow her to work for them despite her disability. The Council asserted as a preliminary point that they were not a trade organisation within the sections, and so were not caught by the provisions. They appealed a finding against them. … Continue reading General Medical Council v H Cox: EAT 22 Mar 2002
Tribunals looking at ‘reasonable adjustment’ cases in disability discrimination are reminded to check the case against the wording of the Act and the published Codes of Practice. Citations: Gazette 03-Feb-1999 Statutes: Disability Discrimination Act 1995 Employment Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.88785
The withdrawal of a job offer to a man with cerebral palsy was not disability discrimination, where it was because of the difficulty of making the arrangements necessary to put the applicant in a position to do the work as opposed to pure work related issues. Citations: Times 22-Oct-1998, Gazette 11-Nov-1998 Statutes: Disability Discrimination Act … Continue reading Kenny v Hampshire Constabulary: EAT 22 Oct 1998
The claimant challenged the failure of the defendant to list its drug strontium ranelate for prescription within the UK. They said that NICE failed to act fairly and with transparency by their failure to supply or disclose to Servier and the other consultees the economic model and underlying data upon which the conclusions of NICE … Continue reading Servier Laboratories Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence and others: Admn 19 Feb 2009
The claimant, a charity assisting immigrants and asylum seekers, challenged a policy document regulating the access to the court of failed applicants facing removal. They said that the new policy, reducing the opportunity to appeal to 72 hours or less, made ineffective any right for judicial review. Held: The request was granted, and the 2010 … Continue reading Medical Justice, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 26 Jul 2010
EAT Unfair Dismissal Disability discrimination The Tribunal had found a dismissal to be unfair because of flaws in a grievance procedure, following which the Claimant had resigned. They also found that the Claimant, who suffered an obsessive compulsive disorder, was subjected to taunts that she would not have had inflicted on her if she had … Continue reading Abbey National Plc v Fairbrother: EAT 12 Jan 2007
The claimant had said that the effect of her dyslexia was to inhibit her career progress. Held:It was right for a tribunal to have regard to how an applicant could carry out duties at work in deciding whether she was within the Disability Discrimination Act. Evidence of how the claimant carries out normal day-to-day activities … Continue reading Law Hospitals NHS Trust v Rush: SCS 13 Jun 2001
 UKEAT 83 – 99 – 2303 Bailii Disability Discrimination Act 1995 England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Post Office v Jones EAT 9-Feb-2000 . .See Also – Post Office v Jones CA 5-Jun-2001 The employee had become diabetic. Upon his coming to require insulin, the employer undertook a new risk assessment, and restricted … Continue reading Post Office v Jones: EAT 23 Mar 1999
EAT Practice and Procedure: Appellate Jurisdiction/Reasons/Burns-Barke Two live issues: (1) The Appellant was not permitted to run a new argument on aiding and abetting under section 57 Disability Discrimination Act 1995. (2) Having heard live evidence I found that the Appellant’s representative (her husband) had not pursued a claim for damages for wrongful dismissal at … Continue reading Marshall v The Learning Trust and Others: EAT 21 Jul 2015
The appellant appealed against a finding that he was not disabled under the Act. He had been a soldier in action and many years later, he suffered flash backs and claimed post traumatic stress disorder. Doctors differed in their diagnosis, and in the standards they used, ICD-10 and DSM-IV. The tribunal failed properly to recognise … Continue reading Blackledge v London General Transport Services Ltd: EAT 3 Aug 2001
The applicant had soft tissue injuries around the spine as a consequence of a back injury at work. He was absent from work for a long time as a result of his injuries, and he was eventually dismissed when his medical advisers could provide no clear idea of when it would be possible for him … Continue reading Clark v TDG Limited (Trading As Novacold): CA 25 Mar 1999
Unfair Dismissal: Reasonableness of Dismissal – DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustments Unfair Dismissal – fairness of the decision to dismiss In circumstances where the advice available to the employer had materially changed between the taking of the decision to dismiss and the dismissal itself, a question arose as to whether this impacted upon the fairness … Continue reading Fox v British Airways Plc (Unfair Dismissal: Reasonableness of Dismissal): EAT 22 Apr 2015
EAT Disability Discrimination: Disability – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Perversity – Disability – whether evidence to support finding – The Claimant had two periods of absence during the latter part of her employment. She had conceded in her witness statement and evidence that she was not a disabled person for the purposes of the Disability … Continue reading The Department for Work and Pensions v Conyers: EAT 5 Nov 2014
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustments UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reasonableness of dismissal The Employment Tribunal, by a majority, found that the Respondent was in breach of a duty to make reasonable adjustments for the Claimant because it would have been a reasonable adjustment to disregard a final written warning. Held: (1) The majority had been … Continue reading General Dynamics Information Technology Ltd v Carranza: EAT 10 Oct 2014
The claimant said that the wihdrawal of overnight support to her at home was unlawful. Held: The claim failed. Her requirement was a need to urinate safely at night, which was satisfied by the new arrangement. Rix, Wilson LJJ, Sir David Keene  EWCA Civ 1109, (2010) 13 CCL Rep 664,  ACD 40 Bailii … Continue reading McDonald, Regina (on The Application of) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: CA 13 Oct 2010
Appeal from possession order – house occupied by school caretaker. Maurice Kay VP, Carnwath, Lloyf LJJ  EWCA Civ 834,  Eq LR 1167,  HLR 46,  NPC 79, (2011) 14 CCL Rep 617,  30 EG 57,  PTSR 56 Bailii Disability Discrimination Act 1995 49A, European Convention on Human Rights 8, Human … Continue reading Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council v Norton and Others: CA 21 Jul 2011
The employee had failed to mention at the hearing of his claim for a redundancy payment a fact which was arguably highly material to the issue of whether his refusal of alternative employment was reasonable; and his claim had been dismissed. He applied for a review. Held: The court was asked whether, and in what … Continue reading Flint v Eastern Electricity Board: EAT 1975
An employer was not absolutely bound by the views of an Occupational Health Practitioner. Longmore, Rimer LJJ, Sir John Mummery  EWCA Civ 1583 Bailii Disability Discrimination Act 1995 England and Wales Citing: Leave – Gallop v Newport City Council CA 31-Jan-2013 Application for leave to appeal – allowed. . . Cited by: Cited – … Continue reading Gallop v Newport City Council: CA 11 Dec 2013
EAT Disability Discrimination : Disability Related Discrimination – Reasonable adjustments – The Respondent was employed by the Appellants as a reception and finance manager. She suffered from work-related stress and severe depression. She resigned from her employment when the Appellants did not act on the recommendations made by the clinical psychiatrist to whom they referred … Continue reading Croft Vets Ltd and Others v Butcher: EAT 2 Oct 2013
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustmentsThe Employment Tribunal did not apply the structured approach in Rowan and Ashton to the Claimant’s claim for reasonable adjustments, or show that it considered s.4A(1) or (3) Disability Discrimination Act 1995, and did not answer a crucial question in its list of issues. The judgment and the consequential remedy … Continue reading Newham Sixth Form College v Sanders: EAT 2 Jul 2013
Lord Justice Mummery  EWCA Civ 910,  IRLR 994,  ICR 1278 Bailii Disability Discrimination Act 1995 England and Wales Employment, Discrimination Updated: 17 November 2021; Ref: scu.421103
The claimant suffered a condition which would lead to the development of vocal nodules unless she followed a program which would allow her to avoid raising her voice. She said that employer should not have placed her within a noisy environment. The employer appealed against a decision that she suffered a disability saying that she … Continue reading SCA Packaging Ltd v Boyle (Northern Ireland): HL 1 Jul 2009
salfordnhs_smithEAT2011 EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION ACTThe Claimant was a physiotherapist employed by the Respondent in a managerial position. At the relevant time she was on long term sick leave because she suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome. She was signed off work by her GP and was unable to return to her post or perform any productive … Continue reading Salford NHS Primary Care Trust v Smith: EAT 26 Aug 2011
The tenant who suffered learning and behavioural difficulties appealed against an order for possession of his council flat. He had become aggressive with the caretaker. The council sought possession, and he defended the claim saying that the council had failed to take account of his disability. Held: The applicable national guidance required the council to … Continue reading Barber v London Borough of Croydon: CA 11 Feb 2010
The claimant a wheelchair user had been unable to travel on a bus when a mother had left her sleeping child in a pushchair. The mother said she was unable to fold down the pushchair, and would not move the child. The claimant said that the driver should have had instructions to insist on this, … Continue reading Firstgroup Plc v Paulley: CA 8 Dec 2014
barlow_stoneEAT2012 EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Aiding and abettingThe Tribunal erred in concluding that it had no jurisdiction to consider a claim of victimisation brought by an employee against a fellow employee under Part II of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. In the circumstances it had: see section 17A(1)(b), section 57(1) and (2) and section 58(1) … Continue reading Barlow v P Stone: EAT 1 Jun 2012
Proving Discrimination – Two Stage Process Each appeal raised procedural issues in discrimination cases, asking where, under the new regulations, the burden of proof had shifted. Held: The new situation required a two stage process before a complaint could be upheld. First the claimant had to establish facts allowing the tribunal to conclude, in the … Continue reading Igen Ltd v Wong: CA 18 Feb 2005
The appellant challenged the extension of time given to the claimant to begin his claim for disability discrimination. Held: The appeal failed: ‘the discretion under the Statute is at large. It falls to be exercised ‘in all the circumstances of the case’ and the only qualification is that the EJ has to consider that it … Continue reading Chief Constable of Lincolnshire Police v Caston: CA 8 Dec 2009
eastern_greyEAT2009 EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION: Reasonable adjustmentsDisability related discriminationThe claimant suffers from dyslexia and was therefore ‘disabled’ as defined in the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (‘the Act’). The issue on the appeal is whether the respondent employer was exempted from making adjustments for the claimant during the interviews process when the claimant applied for a job … Continue reading Eastern and Coastal Kent Pct v Grey: EAT 23 Jan 2009
The tenant had been ordered to leave her flat. She had kept a dog in breach of her tenancy agreement. The landlord had terminated the assured shorthold tenancy by a section 21 notice. She said that they had failed to make reasonable adjustments to allow for her disability, and that the dog was critical to … Continue reading Thomas-Ashley v Drum Housing Association Ltd: CA 17 Mar 2010
The claimant, a former prima ballerina, had suffered injury as she grew old. She came to suffer a condition requiring her to urinate at several points during each night. The respondent had been providing a carer to stay with her each night to provide the assistance neceesary to access the commode. The claimant now appealed … Continue reading McDonald, Regina (on The Application of) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: SC 6 Jul 2011
The claimant sought a declaration that the duty set out in the 1995 Act applies to the discharge of duties, and to the exercise of powers, by local housing authorities under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996 being the part entitled ‘Homelessness’. The defendant argued that (1) the section concerned only the general formulation … Continue reading Pieretti v London Borough of Enfield: CA 12 Oct 2010
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Review Claim under Disability Discrimination Act 1995 dismissed at PHR because Claimant not available to give evidence as to long-term effect of injury – Judge willing to offer adjournment if absence of Claimant had been explained and adjournment applied for – Counsel tells Judge that he does not know reason … Continue reading Council of The City of Newcastle Upon Tyne v Marsden (Rev 1): EAT 23 Jan 2010
Having ‘due regard’ is not Obligation to do The claimant sought to challenge the decision to close her local post office on the basis that being retired and disabled and without a car in a rural area, the office was essential and the decision unsupportable. In particular she challenged the removal of post offices from … Continue reading Brown, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Admn 18 Dec 2008
The appellant was disabled, had legal qualifications, and worked with the respondent as a volunteer. She had sought assistance under the Disability Discrimination Act, now the 2012 Act, saying that she counted as a worker. The tribunal and CA had found no contractual relationship. She said that under the 2000 Directive (the Framework Directive ‘FD’) … Continue reading X v Mid Sussex Citizens Advice Bureau and Another: SC 12 Dec 2012
roberts_nwasEAT2012 EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustmentsThe Tribunal misapplied section 4A of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 by holding that the provision, criterion or practice in question was not applied to the Claimant, and therefore that no duty was owed to him under section 4A. The Tribunal should have followed the statutory wording and asked … Continue reading Roberts v North West Ambulance Service: EAT 24 Jan 2011
The claimant, a former ballerina, challenged the respondent’s decision limiting the care package provided to her in the form of overnight toileting assistance. She said that the change violated her Article 8 rights Frances Patterson QC J  EWHC 1582 (Admin), (2009) 12 CCL Rep 421 Bailii Disability Discrimination Act 1995, European Convention on Human … Continue reading McDonald, Regina (On the Application of) v London Borough Of Kensington and Chelsea: Admn 5 Mar 2009
The employee had become diabetic. Upon his coming to require insulin, the employer undertook a new risk assessment, and restricted his duties as a driver. He claimed disability discrimination. At the tribunal, both employer and employee brought medical evidence. Held: The employer’s duties under the Act had to be seen in the context of the … Continue reading Post Office v Jones: CA 5 Jun 2001
The claimant had been offered and had accepted a job subject to satisfactory health clearance. When that was not received her offer was withdrawn. She had suffered a condition which would affect her daily activities, but had recovered from that condition. She appealed against refusal of her claim for disability discrimination. The evidence suggested that … Continue reading Richmond Adult Community College v McDougall: CA 17 Jan 2008
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS Extension of time: just and equitable2002 Act and pre-action requirements DISABILITY DISCRIMINATIONDisability related discrimination Direct disability discriminationReasonable adjustmentsExclusions/jurisdictionsVICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION: Detriment HARASSMENT: ConductThis case raises issues of legal and practical importance for discrimination cases. It is one of a number of cases in which the Employment Appeal Tribunal is considering whether the judgment … Continue reading Stockton on Tees Borough Council v Aylott: EAT 11 Mar 2009
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – DisabilityJob offer to Claimant withdrawn allegedly as a result of her disclosing a history of depression – On a preliminary issue Tribunal holds that at the material time (June 2008) Claimant not suffering from ‘clinical depression’ amounting to a disability within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.Appeal allowed, and … Continue reading J v DLA Piper UK Llp: EAT 15 Jun 2010
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION: Reasonable adjustmentsDISABILITY DISCRIMINATION: Disability related discriminationThe Claimant suffered from ME. The Tribunal found disability discrimination in that her employer had failed to make reasonable adjustments in that (1) over a short period it had failed to offer her the adjusted hours of work she wanted; (2) it had not installed a stair … Continue reading Shaw and Co Solicitors v Atkins: EAT 11 Feb 2009
EAT SEX DISCRIMINATION: Vicarious liability Sexual harassment claim by an employee of an education authority. Circumstances in which tribunal had misdirected itself as to its own prior judgment and erred in continuing the claim straight to a remedies hearing when an issue of time bar, and, depending on the resolution of that issue, an issue … Continue reading Dundee City Council v Malcolm: EAT 25 Jul 2008
The claimant was a teacher who had come to suffer a sight disability. She complained that her employers had failed to make reasonable accomodation for her disability, and subsequently she resigned claiming constructive dismissal and damages for discrimination. The employer contended that she had not been dismissed within the section. Held: There had been conflicting … Continue reading Nottinghamshire County Council v Meikle: CA 8 Jul 2004
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – S. 98A (2) Employment Rights Act DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Disability related discrimination DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustments DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Compensation Claimant goes off sick following incident of alleged offensive behaviour by manager – Existing mental health difficulties exacerbated – Employers fail, despite recommendation from occupational health department, to carry out … Continue reading Tameside Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v Mylott: EAT 11 Mar 2011
The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant’s decision to discontinue a prosecution, saying that the respondent had failed to consider his duties under the 1995 Act. The prosecution had been discontinued for the victim’s mental instability and quality as a witness. Held: The conclusion drawn by the defendant did not follow from the medical … Continue reading B, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another: Admn 27 Jan 2009
The appellant was employed as a teacher. He became disabled on losing part of his arm. He had been located at a prison and was unable to manage the heavy doors. He complained that the respondent had not made reasonable adjustments by transferring him to other work. The respondent argued and the EAT agreed that … Continue reading Matuszowicz v Kingston Upon Hull City Council: CA 10 Feb 2009
Clients sued their solicitors for negligence. The solicitors responded by claiming that, when acting as advocates, they had the same immunities granted to barristers. Held: The immunity from suit for negligence enjoyed by advocates acting in both criminal and civil proceedings is no longer appropriate or in the public interest and is removed: ‘The standard … Continue reading Arthur JS Hall and Co (A Firm) v Simons; Barratt v Woolf Seddon (A Firm); Harris v Schofield Roberts and Hill (A Firm): HL 20 Jul 2000
Blake J endorsed a six step approach which a public authority will need to address in relation to its duty to make adjustments to avoid indirectly discriminating: ‘1. Did the [public authority] have a practice policy or procedure?
2. Did that . .