The claimant challenged refusal of his claim of discrimination. He was profoundly deaf. He applied for work, and indicated his disability, but no provision was made for a signer to appear at the interview. The interview was re-arranged, but he failed.
Held: The tribunal gave reasons for finding that the disability had played no part in the decision not to employ the claimant. The appeal failed.
EAT Disability Discrimination – Reasonable adjustments.
Judges:
His Honour Judge Peter Clark
Citations:
EAT/6/99, [2000] EAT 6 – 99 – 1101
Links:
Statutes:
Disability Discrimination Act 1995 1
Citing:
Cited – Swiggs and others v Nagarajan HL 15-Jul-1999
Bias may not be intentional
The applicant claimed that he had been denied appointment to a job with London Regional Transport because he had brought a number of previous race discrimination claims against it or associated companies. An industrial tribunal had upheld his claim . .
Cited – Owen and Briggs v James CA 1981
Sex need not be the sole ground on which the less favourable treatment is based. Provided that it is a significant factor, albeit one of a number of factors, the others being gender-neutral, it will be open to an Industrial Tribunal to find that . .
Cited – O’Neill v Governors of St Thomas More Roman Catholic Voluntary Aided Upper School EAT 7-Jun-1996
The dismissal by a Roman Catholic school of a teacher who was pregnant by a priest, was on the grounds of pregnancy, and for an inadmissible reason. The pregnancy was an effective cause of the adverse treatment of the Appellant by her employer. . .
Cited – Goodwin v Patent Office EAT 3-Feb-1999
Tribunals looking at Disability Discrimination should check the four factors in the Act without losing the overall picture. Assistance was available from the WHO Classification of Diseases. Being able to carry out a task did not mean ability was not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Discrimination, Employment
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.171442
