Claimant v Dijla Limited (t/a Dominos Pizza)
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal concluded that the respondent's decision not to employ the claimant was not direct disability discrimination. The judgment was confirmed on reconsideration.
The tribunal found that the respondent's refusal to employ the claimant, though unfavourable treatment arising from disability, was a proportionate means of achieving legitimate aims of maintaining health and safety and customer service standards.
The tribunal concluded that the proposed adjustments (trial shift, use of backpack, placing pizzas on car bonnet, taking items one at a time) were not reasonable in the circumstances, given the impact on speed, temperature, theft risk, and the claimant's safety in non-straightforward delivery conditions.
Facts
The claimant, who had a mobility disability affecting his ability to walk long distances and carry heavy items, applied for a delivery driver role at Dominos Pizza. The respondent observed him during discussions and concluded he could not safely perform the role. The claimant proposed adjustments including using a backpack, taking pizzas one at a time, and having a trial period. The respondent refused to employ him citing health and safety concerns and customer service standards. The claimant brought claims of direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, and failure to make reasonable adjustments, all of which failed. He then applied for reconsideration on eight grounds plus three supplemental points.
Decision
The tribunal refused the reconsideration application, finding no reasonable prospect of varying or revoking the original judgment. The judge concluded that the proportionality test had been correctly applied, the respondent was entitled to rely on legitimate aims advanced at hearing, proposed adjustments were not reasonable given safety risks and impact on service delivery, and no occupational health report was required as the effects of the claimant's disability were apparent.
Practical note
Employers can refuse to employ disabled applicants where proposed reasonable adjustments would not adequately address health and safety risks or operational requirements, and post-hoc legitimate aims can justify discrimination arising from disability if objectively proportionate.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6003854/2025
- Decision date
- 3 October 2025
- Hearing type
- reconsideration
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- hospitality
- Represented
- Yes
Employment details
- Role
- delivery driver
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No