Humphries v Chevler Packaging Ltd: EAT 24 Jul 2006

EAT The Appellant left her employment and claimed (a) unfair constructive dismissal and (b) disability discrimination. On a preliminary point the ET held the disability discrimination claim was out of time as time ran from the date the employer made it clear no further adjustment could be made and not from the date of termination of employment. ET further held it would not extend time.
Held: the decision as to the time limit was correct and the ET was entitled not to extend time.
Reid J said: ‘the failure to make adjustments is an omission. The respondents are omitting to do what (on the appellant’s case) they are obliged to do. They are not doing any act, continuing or otherwise.’ and ‘There is no requirement of motive in paragraph 3(3) and (4) as is suggested by the Claimant. Under paragraph 3(3)(c) the question is whether there has been a decision not to do something. If there has been an inconsistent act, then (in absence of evidence to the contrary) the paragraph provides that the decision is to be taken as having been made when the inconsistent act is done. If there is no inconsistent act, then the person is taken (to paraphrase) to have decided upon the omission at the end of a reasonable time. Thus, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, if there is no evidence of a deliberate decision, a deliberate decision is imputed to the person.’


His Honour Judge Reid QC


[2006] UKEAT 0224 – 06 – 2407




CitedDr Anya v University of Oxford and Another CA 22-Mar-2001
Discrimination – History of interactions relevant
When a tribunal considered whether the motive for an act was discriminatory, it should look not just at the act, but should make allowance for earlier acts which might throw more light on the act in question. The Tribunal should assess the totality . .

Cited by:

CitedMatuszowicz v Kingston Upon Hull City Council CA 10-Feb-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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.243443