Claimant v Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust

The claimant withdrew complaints of direct disability discrimination and discrimination arising from disability in respect of his exclusion from work under MHPS on 4 March 2025.

Claims based on perceived disability of psychosis had no reasonable prospect of success as sections 15, 19 and 20-22 of the Equality Act 2010 require claimant to actually have the protected characteristic. Claims based on actual disability of autism failed because the respondent had no actual or constructive knowledge of the disability and no cogent 'something arising' from disability was identified.

The respondent had no actual or constructive knowledge of the claimant's autism diagnosis at the relevant time. The claimant himself did not know until after the events complained of. There was also no cogent identification of PCPs or how the claimant was disadvantaged as a disabled person in the various allegations.

The claimant failed to identify workable PCPs in relation to various allegations. There was no explanation as to how group disadvantage might exist or be proven. For example, the alleged PCP of allowing sick employees to continue training was not conceivable as the respondent could not make sick doctors work.

The claim was based on constructive dismissal but the claimant had not resigned at the time the claim was brought. He ticked a box confirming employment was continuing, was still being paid, and asked to be released from the respondent at a June hearing. A person must have resigned to claim constructive dismissal. The claim had no reasonable prospect of success.

The respondent accepted that claims of disability-related harassment based on perceived disability of psychosis should not be struck out and must be taken at their highest, so it would not be appropriate to conclude they had no or little reasonable prospect of success. These claims will proceed to a full hearing.