EAT The EAT considered the expression ‘likely to last’ in paragraph 2(1)(b) of the Act, and stated: ‘It is always tempting to accord, and is often appropriate, when it is charged with finding out what at some earlier date the future would then have seem to hold, to have regard to what the future in fact came to pass to be, as, by the date of the hearing, will have sometimes come to be the case’.
‘But both the terms of Schedule 1, paragraph 2(1)(b), and the opening words of paragraph B8 of the Guidance emphasise that here what has to be examined is the existence or not of a likelihood. The question is not whether the impairment in fact lasted at least 12 months (as would very often, given inescapable delays in arranging hearings, be capable of being easily seen by looking backwards from the date of the hearing) but whether the ‘period for which it lasts is likely to be at least 12 months’. Although the latter part of the first sentence of paragraph B8 is unhelpful as guidance, it is not, in our view, intended to displace the otherwise proper construction of paragraph 2(1)(b), which the present tense ‘is likely’ assists towards, namely that the likelihood falls to be judged as it currently was, or would have seemed to have been, at the point when the discriminatory behaviour occurred. The latter part of paragraph B8 (taking account of the typical length rather than the actual length of an effect as it has transpired to be) emphasises that it is not what has actually later occurred but what could earlier have been expected to occur which is to be judged.
Mr Harris has sought to persuade us that Greenwood v British Airways plc [1999] ICR 969 is to the contrary, in particular at p 977E-F. It is clear that in some respects that paragraph is not to the contrary, but to the extent that it is we must respectfully differ from it’.
EAT Disability Discrimination – Disability.
Judges:
The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (P)
Citations:
[2002] ICR 1453, EAT/1303/00, [2002] UKEAT 1303 – 00 – 2002, [2002] ICR 1453
Links:
Statutes:
Disability Discrimination Act 1995
Citing:
See Also – Latchman v Reed Business Information Ltd EAT 7-Mar-2001
. .
Cited – Bwllfa and Merthyr Dare Steam Collieries (1891) Ltd v Pontypridd Waterworks Co HL 1903
A coalmine owner claimed statutory compensation against a water undertaking which had, under its statutory authority, prevented him mining his coal over a period during which the price of coal had risen. The House was asked whether the coal should . .
Cited by:
Cited – Richmond Adult Community College v McDougall CA 17-Jan-2008
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 . .
Overruled – SCA Packaging Ltd v Boyle (Northern Ireland) HL 1-Jul-2009
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Discrimination, Employment
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172093