EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Disability
Disability discrimination – definition of disability – section 6 Equality Act 2010 (‘EqA’)
The Claimant, who was pursuing a complaint of disability discrimination, claimed that he met the definition of a disabled person for the purposes of section 6 EqA by reason of what he contended were the long-term substantial effects of a mental impairment. The ET had not given any directions for expert medical evidence but relied on the Claimant’s own evidence and contemporaneous medical documentation in reaching its conclusion that he had established he had suffered from the condition of which he complained for more than 12 months.
The Respondent appealed on two bases, contending: (1) that the ET had failed to follow relevant authority, in particular RBS v Morris and Royal Borough of Greenwich v Syed in proceeding to determine the question of disability without proper expert medical evidence; and (2) that the ET had misapplied section 6 EqA, finding that the Claimant was disabled on the basis merely that he had suffered from a mental impairment for a period of 12 to 18 months, failing to consider whether the mental impairment had had an effect on the Claimant’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities which was both substantial and long-term.
Held: allowing the appeal
The focus of the ET’s reasoning had been on the length of time the Claimant’s condition had lasted; it had failed to demonstrate that it had addressed the question of the effect of his condition, apparently falling into the error of assuming that, if a medical condition has existed for over 12 months, it did not need to further assess the effects of that condition. That was an error of law and the appeal would be allowed on this basis. In the circumstances, it was not possible to determine whether the ET might have been able to reach a permissible conclusion as to whether the Claimant was disabled for the purposes of section 6 EqA on the material before it (i.e. absent expert medical evidence). The issue of disability would be remitted to a different ET for consideration afresh, including as to whether directions should be given for the obtaining of an expert medical report.
Judges:
Eady QC HHJ
Citations:
[2017] UKEAT 0065 – 17 – 1007
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 29 March 2022; Ref: scu.593134
