Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the claimant was not disabled at the material time under the Equality Act 2010 definition. The claimant did not establish that he had suffered a disability during his employment or a past disability that met the statutory criteria. The claim under section 15 EqA was therefore struck out.
Facts
The claimant brought a claim for discrimination arising from disability under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010. At a preliminary hearing on 25 January 2022, the tribunal found he was not disabled at the material time and struck out his claim. A deposit order was also made. The claimant applied for reconsideration on 16 February 2022, arguing the tribunal failed to properly consider Court of Appeal authority, did not apply the provisions on past disability, gave insufficient weight to medical evidence from Dr Nabavi, and should consider new GP evidence. The tribunal dealt with these points systematically.
Decision
The tribunal refused the reconsideration application, finding no reasonable prospect of varying or revoking the original decision and that reconsideration was not necessary in the interests of justice. The judge found that counsel should have known about the relevant Court of Appeal authority, that the provisions on past disability were not engaged as the claimant had not established a qualifying past disability, and that new post-employment medical evidence should not be admitted. The deposit order could not be reconsidered as it was a case management order not a judgment.
Practical note
Reconsideration applications must overcome the principle of finality of litigation and demonstrate it is necessary in the interests of justice; parties cannot relitigate issues by introducing new evidence or arguments that could have been raised at the original hearing.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1401140/2021
- Decision date
- 31 October 2025
- Hearing type
- reconsideration
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- education
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No