Claimant v Newlaw Legal Ltd t/a Newlaw Solicitors
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the claimant is not disabled as defined under s6 Equality Act 2010 due to ADHD. As disability status is a prerequisite for this claim, it was dismissed as not within the tribunal's jurisdiction.
The tribunal found that the claimant is not disabled as defined under s6 Equality Act 2010 due to ADHD. As disability status is a prerequisite for this claim, it was dismissed as not within the tribunal's jurisdiction.
The tribunal found that the claimant is not disabled as defined under s6 Equality Act 2010 due to ADHD. As disability status is a prerequisite for this claim, it was dismissed as not within the tribunal's jurisdiction.
The tribunal found that the claimant is not disabled as defined under s6 Equality Act 2010 due to ADHD. The harassment claim was expressly predicated on the claimant having this disability and was therefore dismissed as not within the tribunal's jurisdiction.
This claim remains to be determined at a final hearing. The preliminary hearing did not address the merits of this claim.
Facts
The claimant brought claims against his former employer, a solicitors firm, including disability discrimination claims based on ADHD and a separate religion/belief discrimination claim. At a preliminary hearing, the tribunal considered whether the claimant met the definition of disabled under the Equality Act 2010.
Decision
The tribunal found that the claimant is not disabled as defined under s6 Equality Act 2010 due to ADHD. Consequently, all disability-related claims (direct discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, failure to make reasonable adjustments, and harassment) were dismissed as not within the tribunal's jurisdiction. The religion/belief discrimination claim will proceed to a final hearing.
Practical note
A preliminary hearing determination that a claimant is not disabled under s6 Equality Act 2010 will result in dismissal of all disability-related claims as the tribunal lacks jurisdiction without the claimant meeting the statutory definition of disability.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1603762/2024
- Decision date
- 25 April 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- legal services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister