Both cases questioned the extent, as a disability, of functional or psychological ‘overlay’, where there may be no medical condition underlying the symptoms which the employee claims to be present. Neither claimant had asserted any psychological disability. The employees appealed a refusal that they be considered to suffer a disability. ‘Impairment’, has to mean some damage, defect, disorder or disease compared with a person having a full set of physical and mental equipment in normal condition. ‘physical or mental impairment’ refers to a person having something wrong with them physically, or something wrong with them mentally.
EAT Disability Discrimination – Disability
Judges:
Mr Commissioner Howell QC
Citations:
EAT/1487/99, EAT/1385/99
Links:
Statutes:
Disability Discrimination Act 1995
Citing:
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 . .
See Also – McNichol v Balfour Beatty Rail Maintenance Ltd EAT 10-Mar-2000
. .
Cited by:
Appeal from – McNicol v Balfour Beatty Rail Maintenance Limited CA 26-Jul-2002
The Disability Rights Commission sought leave to intervene in a claim between the parties for disability discrimination.
Held: The Commission has important duties, but that did not give it the right, save in exceptional circumstances, to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Discrimination
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.166150