Claimant v Mitie Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
This was a preliminary hearing solely to determine disability status. The tribunal found the claimant was a disabled person by reason of headaches, which had substantial long-term adverse effects on his ability to drive and attend busy places. The substantive discrimination claim has not yet been heard.
This constructive unfair dismissal claim was mentioned in the judgment but not determined at this preliminary hearing. The hearing was limited to the question of whether the claimant had disabled status under the Equality Act 2010.
Facts
The claimant suffered from headaches since around 2007, which caused panic attacks, vertigo-like symptoms, and severely impaired his ability to drive, socialise, and attend crowded places. From 2017 he began taking medication which significantly reduced the symptoms, allowing him to function more normally. The claimant brought claims for disability discrimination and constructive unfair dismissal. The respondent disputed that he was a disabled person.
Decision
The tribunal found that the claimant was a disabled person under the Equality Act 2010 at the material time by reason of his headaches. Applying the deduced effects test, the tribunal concluded that without medication, the claimant's headaches would have had a substantial and long-term adverse effect on his ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities such as driving and attending busy places. The substantive claims will proceed to a full merits hearing.
Practical note
A claimant can establish disability status based on credible oral evidence alone, without medical evidence, where the tribunal is satisfied as to the nature, duration, and substantial adverse effects of the impairment when medication is disregarded.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 4100166/2024
- Decision date
- 14 June 2024
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Name
- Mitie Limited
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No