In an amended ET1, mention was made for the first time of certain disabilities said to be suffered by the Claimant in these terms: ‘Depression, PTSD, ADHD. Further details of reasonable adjustments for hearings will be advised at a later stage.’
The Claimant was represented at a Preliminary Hearing at which no mention was made of any reasonable adjustments. At the liability hearing the Claimant asked to be permitted to write down questions as they were asked. This was acceded to but after a time it became apparent that the process was slowing proceedings very considerably. When the Employment Judge raised this the Claimant suggested that his wife take over the note taking.
The Claimant’s appeal that the ETs change in stance disadvantaged him was dismissed by the EAT which accepted that the ET had allowed the Claimant’s initial request on the understanding that this was because he was unrepresented, not because he suffered from a disability. The ET had not failed in its duty to ensure the effective participation of disabled persons.
Moreover, although the Claimant’s credibility had been commented on adversely by the ET, the decision turned on its acceptance of evidence of the Respondent’s witnesses as to the scoring of the Claimant’s interview.
[2020] UKEAT 0164 – 19 – 2401
Bailii
England and Wales
Updated: 24 August 2021; Ref: scu.653259 br>