fbpx

Knowledge of Disability in Disability Discrimination Claims

Aug 24, 2021

The recent case of David Seccombe v Reed in Partnership Ltd in the Employment Appeal Tribunal decided that a Tribunal was right to conclude that the Claimant was not disabled as he was unable to demonstrate that his mental impairment was long term and, even if he was disabled, the employer did not know, and could not reasonably have known, about the impairment.

Background

Prior to the Claimant’s employment with the Respondent, the Claimant had suffered two short-term episodes of ill-health but neither was deemed to be long-term. When the Claimant commenced his employment with the Respondent, he was required to complete an equal opportunities questionnaire which asked him to confirm if he had any health-related issues or impairments for which the Respondent would be required to make any reasonable adjustments. The Claimant did not disclose any mental health impairment in this questionnaire and therefore the Respondent was not aware of his previous history.

The Claimant’s employment was subject to the satisfactory completion of a nine month probationary period. There had been concerns about his performance early on and he was subject to several performance review meetings where it was decided that his probationary period should be extended. At no point during these performance review meetings did the Claimant raise any mental health impairment and his sickness record was good.

The Claimant then suffered a severe traumatic event and he commenced a period of absence due to a breakdown he suffered as a result. The Respondent was aware of the impact this traumatic event had on the Claimant’s mental health.

Following a short absence, the Claimant was deemed fit to return to work and the Respondent had believed that the issue had been resolved.

Shortly following his return to work, the Claimant attended his quarterly review meeting where it was decided that he would be dismissed on the grounds of his poor performance.

The Claimant contended that the dismissal amounted to disability discrimination as he was a disabled person at the material time and the Respondent was aware of the Claimant’s disability.

Employment Tribunal Decision

The Employment Tribunal held that the Claimant was not a disabled person at the relevant time and his claim was dismissed.

To meet the requirements of the Equality Act 2010, the onus is on the Claimant to show they have a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day to day activities during the period of employment. The Claimant had failed to show that his mental impairment was ‘long-term’ as the effects of his breakdown only lasted a few months before he had returned to work

The Respondent also needed to have known, or be reasonably expected to know, that the Claimant was disabled. Even if the Claimant was disabled, he had not raised this during his employment and had confirmed the opposite in his equal opportunities questionnaire. Therefore, the Tribunal found that the Respondent did not know and could not reasonably have been expected to know that the Claimant was disabled.

The Claimant appealed this decision on the grounds that the Tribunal’s decision was perverse.

The EAT’s Decision

The EAT upheld the Tribunal’s ruling and concluded that there was no perversity in the Tribunal’s decision.

In the judgment, the EAT noted the following in determining whether the Claimant was disabled:

  • The requirement that a disability must be long term relates to the effect of the impairment as opposed to the impairment itself. Therefore, an impairment must have a substantial adverse effect on day-to-day activities (including work activities) to be deemed long-term.
  • What an individual does and does not say about their impairment should be taken into account when assessing if an employee is disabled at the relevant time as they will be best placed to explain the effect their impairment has on their day-to-day activity. For instance, if there is no medical evidence for a period of time but an employee informed a family member or employer of the effects of their condition, this would be relevant to determining if they are disabled. The EAT concluded that this was a matter of fact and degree and not law.

Comment

Whilst this decision will be welcomed by employers, it is wise for employers to continually be on the lookout for any signs that their employees might have a disability and ensure they establish the reasons for any period of absence to give employees every opportunity to make their employer aware of their condition.

If you have any questions about the law surrounding disabilities in the workplace, please do get in touch.

For further information or to discuss the issues raised by this update, please contact our Employment Group on 0118 977 4045 or employment@herrington-carmichael.com.

Click here to see our ‘Employment Law Figures 2021’ which includes basic figures, time off work, living wage, minimum wage and tax rates.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This reflects the law at the date of publication and is written as a general guide. It does not contain definitive legal advice, which should be sought as appropriate in relation to a particular matter.

Darren Smith

Darren Smith

Partner, Employment

Aneesa Zaman

Aneesa Zaman

Trainee Solicitor

Sign up

Enter your email address for legal updates on Employment & Immigration Law.

Please see our privacy policy regarding use of your data.


Employment Management Training Sessions

Darren Smith, a Partner in our Employment team, will be hosting a series of online training sessions looking at essential employment law for managers. Each session will be £79.95 + VAT.

> How to Avoid the Problems of Recruitment & Probation
> Equality, Diversity & Inclusion
> Absence Management
> How to Performance Manage
> Problems with Social Media & actions outside of the workplace
> Disciplinaries and Grievances
> Conducting a Fair Redundancy Process

Contact us

    The information you submit will be handled in accordance with our privacy policy.

    FREE: Legal Insights and Event News 

    Keep you, your family and / or business up to date on how the law affects you, by subscribing to one of our legal insights.

    Subscribe for free Legal Insights
    & Event updates

    Receive the latest legal developments and professional advice to keep your family and business safe.
    Please choose which list you would like to subscribe to below.





    Please see our privacy policy regarding use of your data.


    Latest News & Insights

    Podcasts

    The Legal Room UK Podcast features a diverse range of specialists offering expertise on a variety of topics. 
    Subscribe on whatever podcast platform you use.

    Top Legal Insights

     

    Contract Law

    Material Breach of Contract

    What is a ‘material’ breach of contract by a party to a commercial contract? This is a critical issue regularly considered by the courts. What constitutes a material breach and what are the remedies?

    Property Law

    Commercial Lease: The Financial impact on Landlord and Tenant

    Coronavirus (COVID-19) and the restrictions now in place to control its spread, are having a significant effect on many business sectors.

    Divorce and Family Law

    Divorce in Lockdown: Can I get some discreet legal advice?

    We have spoken to clients who are unfortunately experiencing some family issues, and would like to obtain expert legal advice, yet don’t know how...

    Land & Property Dispute

    Restrictive Covenants – The Price of Modification

    Having identified that your land is burdened by a restrictive covenant and for the purposes of this article the covenant in question will be that only one residential building can be erected on the land. What do you do next?

    Wills, Trusts and Probate

    Why is having a will so important?

    It is entirely up to you if and when you want to create a Will, but it is important to be aware of the consequences of not having a Will.

    Award winning legal advice

    We are solicitors in Camberley, Wokingham and London. In 2019, Herrington Carmichael won ‘Property Law Firm of the Year’ at the Thames Valley Business Magazines Property Awards, ‘Best Medium Sized Business’ at the Surrey Heath Business Awards and we were named IR Global’s ‘Member of the Year’. We are ranked as a Leading Firm 2020 by Legal 500 and Alistair McArthur is ranked in Chambers 2020.

    London

    60 St Martins Lane, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4JS 

    +44 (0) 203 755 0557

     

    Camberley

    Building 2  Watchmoor Park, Riverside Way, Camberley, Surrey  GU15 3YL

    +44 (0)1276 686 222

     

    Wokingham (Appointment only)

    4 The Courtyard, Denmark Street, Wokingham, Berkshire RG40 2AZ

    +44 (0)118 977 4045

    info@herrington-carmichael.com

    © 2021 Herrington Carmichael LLP. Registered in England and Wales company number OC322293.

    Herrington Carmichael LLP is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

    Privacy Policy   |   Legal Notices, T&Cs, Complaints Resolution   |   Cookies

    Client Feedback   |   Diversity Data