Claimant v St John Ambulance
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the claimant did not meet the definition of disability under section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. There was no evidence that Asperger's Syndrome had a substantial adverse effect on his ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. The claimant provided no specific examples of impaired activities and appeared to have successfully coped with or avoided situations that might otherwise have impaired him. The claim was dismissed as the claimant could not establish he was a disabled person.
The tribunal dismissed this claim because the claimant failed to establish he was disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010. Without proving disability status, the claim for indirect disability discrimination could not succeed as a threshold requirement was not met.
This claim was expressly stated to be unaffected by the judgment on the preliminary issue of disability status. The tribunal made clear this claim remains to be determined at a future hearing.
This claim was expressly stated to be unaffected by the judgment on the preliminary issue of disability status. The tribunal made clear this claim remains to be determined at a future hearing.
Facts
The claimant was diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome at age 9 in 2006. He brought claims including direct and indirect disability discrimination against his former employer St John Ambulance. At a preliminary hearing on the sole issue of disability status, the claimant provided minimal medical evidence - only a single page from his GP notes listing the diagnosis. He gave evidence that he experienced difficulties with social cues, preferred routine and predictability, and could find ambiguous instructions stressful, but provided no specific examples of how these affected his day-to-day life. He confirmed he had never required medical intervention for his condition.
Decision
Employment Judge Brewer dismissed the disability discrimination claims, finding the claimant did not meet the definition of disability under section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. The tribunal held there was no evidence that Asperger's Syndrome substantially adversely affected the claimant's ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. The claimant had failed to provide clear examples as ordered and appeared to have successfully managed his condition through reasonable coping strategies. The constructive dismissal and victimisation claims remain to be determined.
Practical note
A diagnosis alone is insufficient to establish disability status - claimants must provide specific, clear evidence of substantial adverse effects on day-to-day activities at the material time, particularly where the person has been managing without medical intervention or support.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2603300/2023
- Decision date
- 21 November 2024
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No