These pages do not apply outside the United Kingdom.

Pallace v Shepherd Homes

1805100/97: Equal Opportunities Review No. 79 May/June 1998 at p15

An architectural technician had a stroke in 1993 and had some difficulty walking and some speech difficulty. Consequently he preferred not to use the phone if he could avoid it, and had told the employers in a review that the phone could occasionally be a problem. In 1997 he was selected for redundancy.

The industrial tribunal held that he was not "disabled". "We are satisfied on the evidence that in the course of his normal day-to-day work for the respondents any difficulty which the applicant perceived by way of speech was not immediately obvious. The applicant acknowledged that in his day to day work it was unlikely that his colleagues would have observed any problems."

(Comment: I have not seen the full text of this judgment.)

Substantial effect

Top