UK disability discrimination law and stammering / stuttering
The Court of Appeal held it was not disability discrimination on the facts to refuse to send an employee on an assignment to Dubai because of high medical risk. The case is of interest on direct disability discrimination (page not yet updated) – it is not enough that the reason for less favourable treatment is … Read moreOwen v Amec Foster Wheeler Energy
For the first time, an appeal court has upheld a claim that (direct) discrimination because the claimant was perceived to have a disability is unlawful under the Equality Act. The claimant did not need to show she actually had a disability. The court also discussed the boundaries of direct discrimination. (More on Perceived disability). June … Read morePerceived disability: Chief Constable of Norfolk v Coffey
A claimant who spoke fast, and may or may not have had cluttering or a stammer, was held not to have a disability within the Equality Act. Employment tribunal, June 2017. Full decision: gov.uk. The claimant had a speech disorder manifesting as fast speech. A speech and language therapist suggested it was perhaps ‘cluttering’ or … Read moreM v Mitie Aviation Security
The EAT held that lifting weights in a warehouse up to 25kg was a normal day to day activity, even where the employer expected staff to do it at a particular speed (pick rate). The claimant’s back problem meant he did it significantly more slowly. The impairment therefore had a substantial effect on his ability … Read moreBanaszczyk v Booker
In deciding whether a dismissal (or other act) by a sole decision-maker is direct discrimination, the court looks only at the motivation of that decision-maker. However inputs into the decision, such as reports, could be separate acts of discrimination. Also it is different where a decision was made jointly. 2015, Court of Appeal (bailii.org) The … Read moreCLFIS (UK) Ltd v Reynolds
The court found it was unlawful discrimination contrary to Article 14 ECHR to dismiss an employee because of his colleagues’ fears about him being HIV positive. Article 14 (non-discrimination) could apply because the case fell within the ambit of Article 8 (right to private life). European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), October 2013. Full decision: … Read moreIB v Greece
The court re-interpreted the Equality Act to comply with EU law, so that a student discriminated against by her work placement provider was not left without a claim. She was entitled to claim against the provider in an employment tribunal. Her right to do this should be excluded only so far as the EqA provisions … Read moreBlackwood v Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust
This European Court of Justice (ECJ) held that under the Framework Employment Directive a ‘disability’ is a long term limitation which results from physical, mental or psychological impairments and hinders participation in professional life. The case has influenced UK tribunals to take account of an impairment’s effect on work-related activities in deciding whether it is … Read moreChacón Navas v Eurest Colectividades SA
The EAT again extended the normal meaning of ‘normal day-to-day activity’ in the light of European law. The EAT held that applying to become a police constable was a ‘normal day-to-day activity’. A memory impairment which led to the claimant not disclosing a previous conviction had a long-term adverse effect on such an application, and … Read moreSobhi v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
In selecting employees for redundancy, the employer carried out a competence assessment which failed to take into the opinion of managers who had worked with the relevant employees. Managers found the results ‘surprising’ and considered they had led to the selection and dismissal of some ‘very good workers’. The employer was held liable for unfair … Read moreMental Health Care v Biluan