Disability; defines 'clinical depression' vs 'adverse life reaction'; symptoms characteristic of depression lasting 12+ months usually qualify as a disability. [Summary not yet checked against the judgment.]
Disability; reasonable adjustments; absence triggers; attendance management policies can place disabled employees at a substantial disadvantage even if applied 'equally'.
“In my judgment, there is no reason artificially to narrow the concept of what constitutes a “step” within the meaning of section 20(3). Any modification of, or qualification to, the PCP in question which would or might remove the substantial disadvantage caused by the PCP is in principle capable of amounting to a relevant step. The only question is whether it is reasonable for it to be taken.”Elias LJ, at [65]
Cited by
References found in the judgments’ text, with the number of paragraphs in which each case is mentioned. Not a classification: how a case was treated is recorded under Later history.
Disability; stress; long-term stress reactions to adverse life events may not amount to a mental impairment if they are just an 'entrenched reaction'. [Summary not yet checked against the judgment.]
Discrimination arising from disability; s.15 EqA; justification. Dismissal of a teacher on long-term sickness absence was disproportionate where the employer could have waited a little longer for the medical position to clarify; proportionality requires considering whether a less severe measure would have achieved the aim. A dismissal that is disproportionate under s.15 will generally also be unreasonable under s.98(4) ERA 1996, though the band of reasonable responses remains the unfair dismissal standard. The employer's failure at the internal appeal to engage with the new medical evidence that the claimant was fit to return was central to the finding of disproportion.
Cited by
References found in the judgments’ text, with the number of paragraphs in which each case is mentioned. Not a classification: how a case was treated is recorded under Later history.
Discrimination arising from disability; s.15 EqA 2010. Section 15(1)(a) requires only an objective causal connection between the disability and the "something" that led to the unfavourable treatment; the employer need not be aware that the something arose in consequence of the disability. Knowledge under s.15(2) bites on the disability itself, not on the causal link [36]-[39]. A tribunal deciding justification under s.15(1)(b) makes its own objective assessment and is not confined to the material the employer had, so a finding that dismissal was reasonable for s.98(4) purposes does not determine proportionality.
Cited by
Cites
References found in the judgments’ text, with the number of paragraphs in which each case is mentioned. Not a classification: how a case was treated is recorded under Later history.
Discrimination arising from disability; s.15 EqA; unfavourable treatment requires placing a hurdle, obstacle, or disadvantage in front of the employee, rather than merely failing to provide an even greater benefit.
Cites
References found in the judgments’ text, with the number of paragraphs in which each case is mentioned. Not a classification: how a case was treated is recorded under Later history.
Discrimination arising from disability; s.15 EqA; justification. It is the outcome (the dismissal), not the employer's process, that must be justified as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim — but an employer that led no evidence of its decision-makers considering less discriminatory alternatives will struggle to establish proportionality. Dismissal was disproportionate where a work trial in another role was not properly evaluated. Protecting public resources and reducing the strain on other employees were legitimate aims.
Cites
References found in the judgments’ text, with the number of paragraphs in which each case is mentioned. Not a classification: how a case was treated is recorded under Later history.
Flexible working; indirect discrimination; a rejected flexible working appeal can be a 'disadvantage' even if later granted.
Cites
References found in the judgments’ text, with the number of paragraphs in which each case is mentioned. Not a classification: how a case was treated is recorded under Later history.
Discrimination arising from disability; s.15 EqA; Pnaiser causation; consistency. Where two s.15 complaints rest on the same 'something arising' (long-term sickness absence) and the same decision-maker's erroneous belief, an ET cannot allow one and dismiss the other on inconsistent reasoning: it erred by failing to consider that unfavourable treatment may have multiple causes and by misstating the 'something arising' differently between the two claims, contrary to Pnaiser v NHS England [2016] IRLR 170 at [31]. Appeal and cross-appeal allowed and both claims remitted for fresh consideration by reference to the same 'something'.
Cites
References found in the judgments’ text, with the number of paragraphs in which each case is mentioned. Not a classification: how a case was treated is recorded under Later history.
Disability; reasonable adjustments; failure to offer a trial period in an alternative role can be a failure to make adjustments.
“As always, the starting point is the words of the statute. Where the other elements of section 20(3) … are, as here, found to be fulfilled, then the duty on the respondent is to take such steps as it is reasonable to have to take “to avoid” the substantial disadvantage at which the PCP puts the disabled claimant.”HHJ Auerbach, at [18]
Cites
References found in the judgments’ text, with the number of paragraphs in which each case is mentioned. Not a classification: how a case was treated is recorded under Later history.