Claimant v Pyramid Posters Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Claim of ordinary unfair dismissal identified at preliminary hearing but not yet determined. Claimant was dismissed on grounds of incapacity due to ill health.
Section 15 claim relating only to act of dismissal on 19 August 2023. Not yet determined at final hearing. Respondent conceded disability in relation to back condition and depression.
Claim under sections 20 and 21 that respondent had PCP around January 2016 requiring claimant carry out normal duties in place of light duties. Respondent's strike-out application refused. Tribunal found claimant had arguable case that PCP continued to be applied and that there was continuing discriminatory conduct, taking claimant's case at its highest. Matter to proceed to final hearing.
Facts
Claimant worked as Warehouse Operative from April 2015 to August 2023. She suffered workplace accident in July 2015 causing back injury. Respondent conceded disability for back condition and depression. Claimant alleged she was required to do normal duties instead of light duties from January 2016 onwards. She was dismissed on 19 August 2023 for ill-health capability due to absence. Claimant alleged depression was caused or aggravated by treatment at work including failures to make adjustments and conduct of supervisor Ms West.
Decision
Preliminary hearing determined two issues: (1) whether claimant was disabled by anxiety at relevant time - tribunal found claimant had not established separate anxiety disorder or mixed anxiety/depression disorder; anxiousness was symptom of conceded depressive disorder. (2) Respondent's strike-out/deposit application for reasonable adjustments claim - refused. Tribunal found claimant had arguable case that requirement to do normal duties was PCP that continued to be applied, and that there was continuing discriminatory conduct linking January 2016 act to August 2023 dismissal.
Practical note
A 7-year gap between alleged discriminatory acts does not automatically preclude conduct extending over a period if claimant can evidence a continuing state of affairs with linked treatment, even where different decision-makers may be involved.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6002602/2023
- Decision date
- 5 January 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- manufacturing
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Warehouse Operative
- Service
- 8 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep