Simon Brown LJ said: ‘As will readily be seen, it provides (perhaps rather surprisingly) that someone is to be treated as disabled even though they are not in fact disabled (even, that is, where they suffer no substantial adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities) if, without the medical treatment they are in fact receiving, they would suffer that disability. One asks the question whether, if treatment were stopped at the relevant date, would the person then, notwithstanding such benefit as had been obtained from prior treatment, have an impairment which would have the relevant adverse effect?’ and in a ‘deduced effect’ case ‘clear medical evidence would be expected, not just the Applicant’s own testimony’.
Judges:
Simon Brown LJ
Citations:
[2003] IRLR 111
Statutes:
Disability Discrimination Act 1995 3(2)(a)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal From – Woodrup v London Borough of Southwark EAT 4-Feb-2002
EAT Disability Discrimination – Disability . .
Cited by:
Cited – Cream Holdings Limited and others v Banerjee and others HL 14-Oct-2004
On her dismissal from the claimant company, Ms Banerjee took confidential papers revealing misconduct to the local newspaper, which published some. The claimant sought an injunction to prevent any further publication. The defendants argued that the . .
Cited – J v DLA Piper UK Llp EAT 15-Jun-2010
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Disability
Job offer to Claimant withdrawn allegedly as a result of her disclosing a history of depression – On a preliminary issue Tribunal holds that at the material time . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Discrimination
Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.416810