Cases3311862/2023

Claimant v London Borough of Brent

31 July 2024Before Employment Judge S MooreBury St Edmundsremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments(disability)struck out

The tribunal found the claimant was without a second laptop for only two weeks (2-17 May 2023) because it had been locked away during her sick leave. Arrangements were being made for her to access it when she returned. Given this short period and the context, the claimant had no reasonable prospect of proving the respondent failed in its duty to make reasonable adjustments.

Victimisationstruck out

The tribunal found that being asked to review a backlog of 400 emails after a lengthy absence and being questioned about locker access issues did not amount to detriments. Even if they did, the tribunal found it fanciful to suggest these actions were because the claimant had brought a tribunal claim rather than normal management activities following her return from sick leave.

Facts

The claimant, employed as a Care Assessor since 2006, had been provided with a second laptop at work as a reasonable adjustment following an Occupational Health report in September 2022. After a lengthy sick leave from November 2022 to March 2023, followed by five weeks' annual leave, she returned to work on 2 May 2023. Her second laptop had been locked away for safekeeping during her absence. She regained access to it by 17 May 2023, meaning she was without it for only two weeks. On her return from another lengthy sick leave period in December 2023, she was asked to review a backlog of 400 emails and experienced issues accessing her locker, which was resolved within days.

Decision

The tribunal struck out all claims as having no reasonable prospect of success. The reasonable adjustments claim failed because being without a second laptop for only two weeks, during which arrangements were being made for access, did not constitute a failure to make reasonable adjustments. The victimisation claims failed because being asked to review emails after a lengthy absence and being questioned about locker access did not amount to detriments, and there was no reasonable prospect of showing these actions were because the claimant had brought a tribunal claim rather than being normal management activities.

Practical note

Procedural delays in reinstating reasonable adjustments after an extended absence, where the period of non-provision is brief and the employer is actively working to resolve the issue, will not constitute a failure to make reasonable adjustments.

Legal authorities cited

Romanowska v Aspirations Care Ltd UKEAT/0015/14Cox v Adeco [2021] ICR 1307Ahir v British Airways [2017] EWCA Civ 1392Ezias v North Glamorgan NHS Trust [2007] IRLR 603

Statutes

Equality Act 2010 s.20Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 rule 39Equality Act 2010 s.27

Case details

Case number
3311862/2023
Decision date
31 July 2024
Hearing type
strike out
Hearing days
1
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
local government
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
Care Assessor
Service
18 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No