Cases1400018/2024

Claimant v The Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary

28 September 2025Before Employment Judge CuthbertBristolin person

Outcome

Other

Individual claims

Discrimination Arising from Disability (s.15)(disability)not determined

This was a preliminary hearing to determine whether the claimant was disabled under the Equality Act 2010 during the relevant time (26 April 2023 to 29 September 2023). The tribunal found that the claimant was disabled by reason of fibromyalgia during that period (a recurring condition with substantial adverse effects on day-to-day activities likely to recur, thus long-term), but not disabled by reason of stress/anxiety (as the substantial adverse effects did not last 12 months and were not shown to be likely to recur). The disability discrimination claims may now proceed on the basis of the fibromyalgia disability.

Facts

The claimant, a Community Support Officer with Avon and Somerset Constabulary, was subject to disciplinary proceedings from October 2022 onwards. She brought claims including disability discrimination, added by amendment. The claimant relied on fibromyalgia (diagnosed 2019) and stress/anxiety. The relevant time for assessing disability was 26 April to 29 September 2023, covering the disciplinary hearings and appeal. During mid-2023 the claimant experienced increased stress/anxiety due to the work situation and her son's serious motorbike accident, and her fibromyalgia symptoms flared up. She prepared a disability impact statement and disclosed medical records, though much of the evidence was not focused on the relevant period and some relevant records were not obtained.

Decision

The tribunal found the claimant was disabled by reason of fibromyalgia during the relevant time (26 April – 29 September 2023). The tribunal accepted fibromyalgia caused substantial adverse effects on day-to-day activities (mobility, concentration, sleep, household chores, physical activities) which were long-term because they were recurring and likely to recur based on her medical history since 2019. The claimant was not found to be disabled by reason of stress/anxiety, as the substantial adverse effects did not last 12 months and there was insufficient evidence they were likely to recur. The disability discrimination claims may proceed on the basis of fibromyalgia.

Practical note

In disability cases, evidence must be focused on the relevant time period — post-hoc evidence is irrelevant, and historical episodes of a condition must be supported by evidence of effects at those earlier times to establish recurrence.

Legal authorities cited

Goodwin v Patent Office [1999] ICR 302Sullivan v Bury Street Capital Limited [2021] EWCA Civ 1694Walker v Sita Information Networking Computing Limited [2012] UKEAT 0097/12McNicol v Balfour Beatty Rail Maintenance Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 1074Primaz v Carl Room Restaurants Ltd [2021] WL 05510289Law Hospital Trust v Rush [2001] IRLR 611Cruickshank v VAW Motorcast [2002] IRLR 24Chacón Navas v Eurest Colectividades SA [2006] IRLR 706SCA Packaging Ltd v Boyle [2009] ICR 1056McKechnie Plastic Components v Grant UKEAT/0284/08Williams v Leukaemia and Lymphoma Research UKEAT/0493/13Stedman v Haven Leisure Ltd [2025] EAT 82Ginn v Tesco Stores Ltd UKEAT/0197/05J v DLA Piper UK LLP [2010] ICR 1052

Statutes

Equality Act 2010 Sch 1 para 2Equality Act 2010 Sch 1 para 5Equality Act 2010 s.212Equality Act 2010 s.6

Case details

Case number
1400018/2024
Decision date
28 September 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
public sector
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
Community Support Officer

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister