Claimant v Foremost Care UK Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the respondent had no knowledge (nor could reasonably have had knowledge) that the claimant's lipoma amounted to a disability at the relevant time in May 2023, as he had declared no health issues on a pre-employment questionnaire, only mentioned surgery would resolve the issue within 8 months, and medical evidence described him as 'generally fit and well'. Additionally, the claim was brought out of time (May 2023 refusal, claim filed February 2024) and the tribunal refused to extend time on just and equitable grounds due to the claimant's lack of candour about his health condition.
The tribunal found the respondent had no knowledge of the claimant's disability at any material time. Furthermore, the dismissal was not because of sickness absence arising from disability, but due to the claimant's lack of candour about his health condition and the respondent's concerns about compliance with Home Office sponsorship requirements after receiving medical evidence stating the claimant was 'generally fit and well' despite months of unexplained absence without fit notes.
Facts
The claimant, a foreign national requiring a work visa, was employed as a domiciliary care assistant from April 2023. He completed a pre-employment health questionnaire stating he had no physical limitations, despite having a lipoma on his back. After working only 4 days, he went off sick and never returned. In May 2023 he requested to work 3 days per week with rest days in between, which was refused. He was dismissed in January 2024 after the respondent received Home Office advice regarding his prolonged sick leave and had concerns about his lack of medical documentation, having only received a surgeon's letter stating he was 'generally fit and well'.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed both disability discrimination claims. The respondent had no knowledge (nor could reasonably have had knowledge) that the claimant's condition amounted to a disability, as he had declared no health issues when applying, stated surgery would resolve the issue, and medical evidence said he was 'fit and well'. The reasonable adjustments claim was also out of time and the tribunal refused to extend time due to the claimant's lack of candour. The dismissal was found to be due to concerns about the claimant's reliability and sponsorship compliance, not his sickness absence itself.
Practical note
An employer cannot be liable for disability discrimination if it has no actual or constructive knowledge that a worker's condition amounts to a disability under the Equality Act 2010, particularly where the worker has actively concealed their condition in pre-employment health declarations and medical evidence suggests the condition is transient and resolvable.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3303481/2024
- Decision date
- 19 September 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep
Employment details
- Role
- Domiciliary Care Assistant
- Service
- 9 months
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No