Cases3307561/2023

Claimant v DHL Services Limited

19 May 2025Before Employment Judge AllenCambridgeremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Discrimination Arising from Disability (s.15)(disability)failed

The tribunal found that the claimant failed to establish he was a disabled person within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010. Although the respondent accepted he had a prolapsed disc with substantial adverse effects during the relevant period, the claimant did not prove on the balance of probabilities that the effects were likely to last at least 12 months or were likely to recur. The medical evidence showed improvement over time and did not support a finding of long-term effects.

Facts

The claimant was employed as a delivery driver from 28 November 2022 and sustained a back injury on 28 December 2022. He was diagnosed with back strain and potentially some degree of disc prolapse. He was off work from 30 December 2022 until dismissed on 14 February 2023 during his probationary period due to high sickness absence. The claimant subsequently received physiotherapy and reported 75-85% improvement by June 2023.

Decision

The tribunal found that while the respondent accepted the claimant had a prolapsed disc with substantial adverse effects during the relevant period, the claimant failed to prove the effects were likely to last 12 months or were likely to recur. The GP notes showed improvement over time, and the claimant was discharged from physiotherapy as symptom-free. The claimant therefore failed to establish he was disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010.

Practical note

In disability status preliminary hearings, contemporaneous medical evidence showing improvement and discharge from treatment without ongoing symptoms will be insufficient to establish the long-term nature of effects, particularly where the claimant bears the burden of proof and cannot rely on post-dismissal events to demonstrate likelihood of 12-month duration or recurrence.

Legal authorities cited

Tesco Stores Ltd v TennantGoodwin v Patent Office [1999] ICR 302All Answers Ltd v. W and anor [2021] EWCA Civ 606Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Morris UKEAT/0436/10

Statutes

Equality Act 2010 Sch.1 para.2(2)Equality Act 2010 s.6Equality Act 2010 Sch.1 para.2(1)

Case details

Case number
3307561/2023
Decision date
19 May 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
logistics
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
delivery driver
Service
3 months

Claimant representation

Represented
No