Claimant v Capita Business Services Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the respondent did not have knowledge of the claimant's disability of anxiety and depression, which is a complete defence under s15(2) EqA. Additionally, the tribunal found insufficient evidence that the claimant's slow processing speed arose from anxiety and depression, as there was medical evidence from 2011 only and other factors such as childcare responsibilities affected her performance. Even if established, dismissal was found to be a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aim of processing work efficiently.
The claim failed primarily because the respondent did not know and could not reasonably have been expected to know that the claimant had anxiety and depression, so the duty to adjust did not arise. Alternatively, the tribunal found the claimant was not placed at a substantial disadvantage compared with non-disabled persons. In any event, the respondent had made reasonable adjustments by reducing performance targets and providing Read Aloud and dictate functionality in Microsoft, which the tribunal found sufficient for the straightforward tasks involved. The claimant never tried these tools.
Facts
The claimant worked remotely for Capita as a Revenues and Benefits Officer apprentice from November 2022 to May 2023. She was dismissed during probation for poor performance, failing to meet task completion targets. The claimant requested assistive technology (ClaroRead, Dragon, MindManager) citing slow processing speed. She disclosed a leg condition on recruitment but did not disclose anxiety and depression until late January 2023. Performance issues also related to childcare commitments affecting availability. The respondent reduced her targets and provided Microsoft Read Aloud and dictate functionality.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all claims. The respondent did not have actual or constructive knowledge that the claimant had anxiety and depression, which was the only disability relied upon at hearing. There was insufficient medical evidence that slow processing speed arose from anxiety and depression. The tribunal found the respondent had made reasonable adjustments by reducing targets and providing assistive technology via Microsoft. Even if adjustments requested had been provided, the claimant would not have passed probation due to other time commitments.
Practical note
Employers cannot be liable for disability discrimination if they have no knowledge of the specific disability relied upon, even if they know of other medical conditions; claimants must provide sufficient medical evidence linking their disability to the disadvantage claimed.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2215439/2023
- Decision date
- 18 June 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Revenues and Benefits Officer, Apprentice Level 3
- Service
- 6 months
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No