EAT Disability discrimination – Disability
Compulsory admission of a patient under the Mental Health Act is not automatically a disability under the DDA 1995. In the circumstances of this case the severity of the Claimant’s condition did mean she had an impairment with a substantial adverse effect on day-to-day activities.
In determining whether or not a condition is likely to recur for the purposes of the assessment of disability under the DDA 1995, it is relevant to consider not only those matters extant at the date the tort was committed, but those occurring up to the date of the hearing. Bwllfa and Merthyr v Pontypridd Waterworks Company [1903] AC 426 HL and Golden Strait Corporation v Nipong Yusen 2007 UKHL 12 applied. On the issue of whether the Claimant’s mental impairment would be likely to recur at the date of her rejection for a job in 2005, it was relevant to consider that it had in fact recurred when she was recommitted under the Mental Health Act and that such was a mental impairment within the meaning of the Act.
McMullen QC HHJ
[2007] UKEAT 0589 – 06 – 1307, UKEAT/0589/06/DM, [2007] ICR 1567, [2007] IRLR 771
Bailii, EAT
England and Wales
Citing:
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 – Golden Strait Corporation v Nippon Yusen Kubishka Kaisha (‘The Golden Victory’) HL 28-Mar-2007
The claimant sought damages for repudiation of a charterparty. The charterpary had been intended to continue until 2005. The charterer repudiated the contract and that repudiation was accepted, but before the arbitrator could set his award, the Iraq . .
Cited by:
Cited – Vaughan v London Borough of Lewisham and Others (Practice and Procedure : Costs) EAT 6-Jun-2013
EAT Practice and Procedure : Costs – Tribunal orders that Appellant should pay Respondents one-third of their costs (estimated prior to assessment at andpound;260,000) on the basis that the claim was misconceived . .
At EAT – 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 When that was not received her offer was withdrawn.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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Discrimination
Leading Case
Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.254591
