DISABILITY DISCRIMNATION – Exclusions/jurisdictions
The Tribunal had not erred in concluding that a manifestation of the Claimant’s post-traumatic stress disorder and dissociative amnesia was a tendency to steal which was an excluded condition pursuant to Regulation 4(1)(b) Equality Act 2010 (Disability) Regulations 2010 (SI 2010/2128). The ET was entitled, on the evidence, to reject the Claimant’s contention that his behaviour merely memory loss and forgetfulness and not dishonest. The Tribunal had correctly applied Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crackfords [2017] UKSC 67. Since the effective cause of the Claimant’s dismissal – the discriminatory treatment complained of – was the excluded condition, it followed that the ET did not err in dismissing the complaint of disability discrimination ( Edmund Nuttall Ltd v Butterfield [2006] ICR 77 followed and applied).
The ET did not err in conducting the Preliminary Hearing before a Judge sitting alone rather than a full Tribunal since neither party had made a request for a full Tribunal pursuant to Rule 55 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure . The Tribunal’s findings of fact were not perverse. The Tribunal decision was upheld.
Citations:
[2018] UKEAT 0099 – 18 – 0309
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment, Discrimination
Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.630728
