Cases3202168/2023

Claimant v Office for National Statistics

15 May 2025Before Employment Judge IllingEast Londonin person

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

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

The tribunal found that the claimant was not a disabled person as defined by section 6 Equality Act 2010. The tribunal concluded that the claimant's reaction resulting in absence from work and short period of lack of self-care were adverse reactions to life events at work, not substantial adverse effects of an impairment. The claimant suffered little or no adverse effect from his impairment on day-to-day activities but for workplace issues. The claim therefore failed at the preliminary jurisdictional hurdle of establishing disability status.

Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments(disability)failed

The tribunal found that the claimant was not a disabled person as defined by section 6 Equality Act 2010. Without establishing disability status, the duty to make reasonable adjustments under sections 20 and 21 Equality Act 2010 could not arise. The claim was therefore dismissed as the claimant did not satisfy the threshold requirement of being a disabled person at the relevant time.

Facts

The claimant was employed as a Field Interviewer by ONS from October 2017 until dismissal on 27 June 2023. He was signed off sick from 14 August 2020 onwards with stress at work, obtaining 19 fit notes all citing this diagnosis. He had been diagnosed with anxiety and depressive disorder from August 2019. The claimant refused to return to work until the respondent apologised for alleged ideological harassment. He refused medication and talking therapies. Occupational health in 2020 found his symptoms were situational and would improve if organisational issues were resolved. The claimant's injury benefit application was rejected because the condition was deemed an exacerbation of a pre-existing condition.

Decision

The tribunal found that while the claimant had a long-term mental impairment of anxiety and depressive disorder, he was not disabled within the meaning of section 6 Equality Act 2010 because there was no substantial adverse effect on his day-to-day activities. The tribunal concluded that the claimant's absence from work and brief period of poor self-care in August 2023 were adverse reactions to workplace events, not manifestations of a disabling impairment. The discrimination arising from disability and reasonable adjustments claims were therefore dismissed.

Practical note

Stress-related absence from work, even if prolonged and linked to a diagnosed mental health condition, will not satisfy the disability definition if the tribunal finds it is primarily a reaction to adverse workplace events rather than a substantial impairment affecting day-to-day activities independent of the workplace context.

Legal authorities cited

J v DLA Piper UK LLP [2010] ICR 1052All Answers Ltd v Wes [2021] IRLR 612McDougall v Richmond Adult Community College [2008] IRLR 227London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm [2008] UKHL 43Paterson v Comr of Police of the Metropolis [2007] IRLR 763Herry v Dudley Metropolitan Council [2017] ICR 610Mutombo-Mpania v Angard Staffing Solutions Ltd UKEATS/002/18/JW

Statutes

Equality Act 2010 Schedule 1Equality Act 2010 s.6Equality Act 2010 s.15Equality Act 2010 ss.20 & 21

Case details

Case number
3202168/2023
Decision date
15 May 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
2
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
public sector
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
Field Interviewer
Service
6 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No