Claimant v Secretary of State for Justice
Outcome
Individual claims
Claimant's post-concussion syndrome did not satisfy the long-term requirement of s6 Equality Act 2010. Tribunal concluded on the medical evidence available at the material time (by 8 April 2024) that the impairment was not 'likely' to last twelve months. All medical evidence anticipated recovery within weeks/a few months. Claim dismissed as claimant was not a disabled person.
Claim failed because tribunal found claimant was not a disabled person within the meaning of s6 Equality Act 2010 at the material times. Without established disability status, there was no duty to make reasonable adjustments.
Claim relates to use of phrase 'language barrier' by manager Mr Kerr on two occasions in March and April 2024. Respondent contends this was shorthand for difficulty raised by claimant herself and not unwanted conduct related to race. This claim will proceed to full hearing for determination.
Claim relates to alleged PCP of assuming non-native born employees or those whose first language was not English faced a language barrier. Respondent denies applying such a PCP. This claim will proceed to full hearing for determination.
Facts
Claimant, a Hong Kong national, worked as a prison officer at HMP Winchester from May 2023. She suffered a head injury on 3 December 2023 resulting in post-concussion syndrome causing persistent headaches, dizziness, balance issues and inability to work. She was dismissed on 8 April 2024 for medical inefficiency during probation. She alleged her manager Mr Kerr made discriminatory comments about a 'language barrier' in March and April 2024.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the disability discrimination claims (s15 and s20/21) finding the claimant's post-concussion syndrome was not 'long-term' within s6 EqA 2010 as all medical evidence at the material time predicted recovery within weeks/months. The race discrimination claims (harassment and indirect discrimination) relating to 'language barrier' comments will proceed to full hearing.
Practical note
Medical evidence available at the time of discrimination is crucial for establishing long-term impairment under s6 EqA 2010; tribunals cannot rely on retrospective knowledge of how a condition actually progressed when determining disability status.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6003725/2024
- Decision date
- 29 July 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- central government
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- prison officer
- Service
- 11 months
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No