EAT PART TIME WORKERS
A police officer was found by the Tribunal to be significantly disadvantaged compared with his peers when carrying out examinations for promotion. Nonetheless, the Tribunal held that he was not disabled within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 because that was not a normal day-to-day activity. In so far as he did claim to be suffer substantial adverse effects on his ability to carry out what the Tribunal accepted were day-to-day activities, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the effects were substantial. They were minor.
The EAT upheld the appeal. The Tribunal had misdirected itself on the proper approach to the meaning of disability. It would wholly undermine the protection afforded by this legislation if the Tribunal were correct.
‘We must read section 1 in a way which gives effect to EU law. We think it can be readily done, simply by giving a meaning to day-to-day activities which encompasses the activities which are relevant to participation in professional life. Appropriate measures must be taken to enable a worker to advance in his or her employment. Since the effect of the disability may adversely affect promotion prospects, then it must be said to hinder participation in professional life.’
Judges:
Elias J P
Citations:
[2007] UKEAT 0635 – 06 – 2307, [2007] IRLR 763, [2007] ICR 1522
Links:
Statutes:
Disability Discrimination Act 1995, Council Directive of 27 November 2000 (2000/78/EEC), Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (Amendment Regulations) 2003
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Ekpe v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis EAT 25-May-2001
EAT Disability Discrimination – Disability
Langstaff QC R said: ‘The question whether the impact of the impairment is upon normal day-to-day activities is, of course, judged by asking whether or not any of . .
Cited – Vicary v British Telecommunications Plc EAT 19-Feb-1998
A medical report in a disability discrimination claim should deal with the doctor’s diagnosis of the impairments, the doctor’s observation of the applicant carrying out day to day activities and the ease with which he was able to perform those . .
Cited – Cruickshank v VAW Motorcast Ltd EAT 1-Nov-2000
The relevant date for determining whether discrimination exists is the date of the alleged discrimination. . .
Cited – Sonia Chacon Navas v Eurest Colectividades SAs (Social Policy) ECJ 11-Jul-2006
ECJ Directive 2000/78/EC – Equal treatment in employment and occupation – Concept of disability.
The concept of disability should be given a uniform and autonomous meaning throughout the EU. The court . .
Cited – Law Hospital NHS Trust v Rush; re an Order and Justment of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Dated 21st January 2000 IHCS 13-Jun-2001
. .
Cited – Regina (H) v Ashworth Hospital Authority and Others, Regina (Ashworth Hospital Authority) v Mental Health Review Tribunal for West Midlands and North West Region and Others CA 28-Jun-2002
The patient was detained under the Act. The Mental Health Tribunal decided he should be released. The hospital disagreed. The patient continued to reside to the Hospital voluntarily, but the hospital viewed the decision to release him as . .
Cited – Cruickshank v VAW Motorcast Ltd EAT 25-Oct-2001
The point of time at which to assess disability is at the time of the alleged discrimination. . .
Cited – Mangold v Helm ECJ 22-Nov-2005
ECJ Grand Chamber – Directive 1999/70/EC – Clauses 2, 5 and 8 of the Framework Agreement on fixed-term work – Directive 2000/78/EC – Article 6 – Equal treatment as regards employment and occupation – Age . .
Cited – Adeneler and Others v Ellinikos Organismos Galaktos ECJ 4-Jul-2006
A Directive was belatedly transposed into national law and after the date by which it ought to have been implemented. The question arose whether the obligation to interpret national law in accordance with the Directive existed from the date the . .
Cited by:
Cited – Hart v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary EAT 6-Dec-2007
EAT Disability discrimination – Reasonable adjustments
The Tribunal found that the Chief Constable was entitled to terminate the services of a probationary constable who could not successfully complete her . .
Cited – Cardwell v The Youth Justice Agency NIIT 8-Jul-2008
. .
Cited – Bourne v ECT Bus Cic EAT 31-Mar-2009
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION: Disability
The Employment Tribunal found as a fact that the Claimant was not disabled. That conclusion was challenged on various grounds including perversity. Appeal dismissed . .
Cited – Chief Constable of Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary v Adams EAT 3-Apr-2009
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION: Disability
Employment Tribunal found that a police constable who suffered from ME and had mobility problems between about 2am and 4am when working night shift as part of a . .
Cited – Birmingham City Council v Ali and Others; Moran v Manchester City Council HL 1-Jul-2009
Homelessness Status Requires LA Action
The House considered appeals challenging whether local authorities who gave unacceptable housing to the homeless had satisfied their obligations to them as homeless people. What was meant by the phrase ‘accommodation which it would be reasonable for . .
Cited – Sobhi v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis (Disability Discrimination : Disability) EAT 2-May-2013
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Disability
A woman who suffered from dissociative amnesia, which had made her forget that she had a previous conviction, and who was reprimanded for failing to disclose it . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Police
Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.258504
