Claimant v Nevro Medical Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The allegation that the first respondent failed to tick boxes regarding reasonable adjustments on occupational health referrals was struck out. The tribunal found the claimant had no reasonable prospect of showing she suffered a detriment, as occupational health reports confirmed she was unfit to return to work and the only suggested adjustment (payment for therapy) had been independently considered and refused.
The same allegation brought as victimisation was struck out on the same basis: no reasonable prospect of establishing detriment from the failure to tick reasonable adjustments boxes on occupational health referrals, given the claimant's unfitness for work and independent consideration of her therapy payment request.
Facts
The claimant brought multiple disability discrimination and victimisation claims against her employer and individual respondents. One allegation concerned the failure to tick boxes about reasonable adjustments on occupational health referral forms dated 5 January and 25 April 2024. Occupational health reports confirmed the claimant was unfit for work and unable to return in the foreseeable future. The claimant had requested payment for therapy sessions, which was considered and refused independently of any occupational health recommendation.
Decision
The tribunal struck out allegation 2.4 in claim 2 as both direct disability discrimination and victimisation. The tribunal found no reasonable prospect of the claimant establishing detriment from the failure to tick boxes, given that she was medically unfit to return to work and the only suggested adjustment had been independently considered and refused. A strike out was more appropriate than a deposit order given the claimant already had dozens of allegations before the tribunal.
Practical note
A procedural failure to tick boxes on occupational health referral forms will not amount to actionable discrimination where the substantive question was addressed, the employee was medically unfit for work, and any suggested adjustments were independently considered.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1804268/2023
- Decision date
- 16 December 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor