Cases6000814/2023

Claimant v Hampshire County Council

16 January 2025Before Employment Judge N J Roperremote video

Outcome

Partly successful

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalnot determined

The preliminary hearing was limited to determining disability status. The substantive unfair dismissal claim remains to be determined at a future hearing.

Discrimination Arising from Disability (s.15)(disability)partly succeeded

The tribunal found the claimant was disabled from 1 February 2023 only. Claims relating to alleged discrimination before that date (including refusal of redeployment on 5 December 2022) were dismissed, but claims from 1 February 2023 onwards remain to be determined.

Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments(disability)failed

The claim relating to application of the sickness policy from August 2022 was dismissed because the tribunal found the claimant was not disabled until 1 February 2023, so the duty to make adjustments did not arise during the period complained of.

Breach of Contractwithdrawn

The claimant withdrew his claim for breach of contract and/or unlawful deduction from wages relating to notice pay during the hearing.

Unlawful Deduction from Wageswithdrawn

Withdrawn by the claimant along with the breach of contract claim relating to notice pay.

Facts

The claimant worked as a Secure Children's Home Practitioner from January 2016 until March 2023. He was suspended in May 2022 following a safeguarding incident, during which he injured his shoulder. Though exonerated, he did not return to work and commenced long-term sickness absence from June 2022 due to anxiety and depression. He attended four occupational health appointments and received therapy from NHS Steps to Wellbeing. He was dismissed on notice in February 2023 following a final absence review meeting he did not attend, with his employment ending on 24 March 2023.

Decision

The tribunal found the claimant was a disabled person by reason of anxiety and depression, but only from 1 February 2023. By that date, he had been absent for over seven months with substantial adverse effects on day-to-day activities and medical evidence showed increasing symptoms requiring further support, making it likely the condition would last 12 months. Claims for discrimination arising from disability before 1 February 2023 and failure to make reasonable adjustments from August 2022 were dismissed.

Practical note

When determining disability status for progressive mental health conditions, tribunals will assess the point at which it became 'likely' (in the sense of 'could well happen') that substantial adverse effects would last 12 months, not merely when the impairment began or when it actually reached 12 months' duration.

Legal authorities cited

Goodwin v Patent Office [1999] ICR 302SCA Packaging v BoyleMcDougall v Richmond Adult Community CollegeAll Answers v W [2021] IRLR 612Tesco Stores Limited v Tennant UKEAT/0617/19Seccombe v Reed in Partnership Ltd UKEAT/0213/00J v DLA Piper UK LLP [2010] ICR 1052Aderemi v London and South Eastern Railway Ltd [2013] ICR 591

Statutes

Equality Act 2010 Schedule 1 paragraph 2(1)Equality Act 2010 s.15Equality Act 2010 s.212(1)Equality Act 2010 s.6

Case details

Case number
6000814/2023
Decision date
16 January 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Name
Hampshire County Council
Sector
local government
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
Secure Children's Home Practitioner
Service
7 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No