Site icon swarb.co.uk

Saad v University Hospital Southampton NHS Trust and Another: EAT 4 Dec 2014

EAT Disability Discrimination: Disability
The Appellant was a Specialist Registrar in cardiothoracic surgery. He contended that he had a disability within the meaning of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. He had an impairment in the form of a depressive and general anxiety disorder. He contended that the impairment had a substantial and long-term adverse effect upon his normal day-to-day activities. He contended that the tribunal misdirected itself in determining whether he had a disability as the tribunal did not consider the effect of the impairment on the work environment and, in particular, his ability to communicate with colleagues, access the work-place and concentrate. He submitted that, if the tribunal had addressed those issues, it would have found that the impairment had substantial adverse effects upon him or, alternatively, it had failed to find the relevant facts necessary to determine those issues. Further, the Appellant contended that the tribunal misdirected itself as to the meaning of ‘long-term’ in section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 as it failed to appreciate that adverse effects could be long term even if they fluctuated over time.
On a fair reading of the decision, as a whole, the tribunal did assess the effects of the impairment on the work environment including the Appellant’s ability to communicate with colleagues, access the work place and concentrate. It was entitled to conclude, on the evidence before it, that the impairment did not have a substantial adverse affect on the Appellant’s normal day-to-day activities. Further, the tribunal had not misdirected itself as to the meaning of ‘long-term’.

Lewis J
[2014] UKEAT 0184 – 14 – 0412
Bailii
Equality Act 2010 6
England and Wales

Employment, Discrimination

Updated: 24 December 2021; Ref: scu.539745

Exit mobile version