EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
Direct disability discrimination
Reasonable adjustments
The Employment Tribunal rejected the Appellant’s contention that the reason for his treatment by the Respondent of which he complained was a perception that he had a dangerous mental illness. Any argument that action taken on grounds of a perception of mental illness is for a reason relating to or on grounds of disability within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1975 is therefore academic in this appeal. In any event on the current state of the law, conduct of which complaint is made under DDA must be for a reason relating to or on grounds of actual not perceived disability. Coleman v Attridge Law [2008] ICR 1128, EBR Attridge LLP v Coleman [2010] ICR 242 and English v Thomas Sanderson Blinds Ltd [2009] IRLR 206 considered. An argument that bad behaviour was so much part and parcel of the Appellant’s disability that treatment because of such behaviour was unlawful discrimination was not in the ET and would have required relevant findings of fact.
In making the statutory comparison for determining whether there has been less favourable treatment the bad behaviour is not to be ‘stripped out’. London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm [2008] IRLR 700 applied. The appeal from the dismissal of disability discrimination claims dismissed.
In assessing the reasonableness of the adjustment the Employment Tribunal was entitled to have regard to the need that a police officer should not appear to present a danger to colleagues or to the public.
The appeal from the dismissal of reasonable adjustments claims also dismissed.
Judges:
Slade DBE J
Citations:
[2010] UKEAT 0226 – 09 – 2106
Links:
Statutes:
Disability Discrimination Act 1975
Employment, Discrimination
Updated: 19 August 2022; Ref: scu.417098