Robinson v Nottingham Healthcare NHS
Hello and welcome back to our Case of the Week.
If you missed last week’s update, you can catch up here.
I’m Kyle, one of the solicitors at PJH Law and this week I’ll be giving you a brief update on a noteworthy case that reached the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT). The case centres on whether the Claimant was considered to have a disability under the Equality Act 2010.
The Claim
The Claimant, Ms Robinson, was employed by the Respondent Trust as a temporary staffing administrator from 7 September 2020 until she resigned on 16 June 2022.
The case centred on whether the Claimant, who suffered from generalised anxiety and panic disorder, argued that she met the definition of having a disability under the Equality Act 2010. The Claimant had contended that her anxiety substantially impacted several normal day-to-day activities, including attending appointments, shopping, completing household tasks, sleeping, driving, and communication. She had also raised issues during her employment regarding her inability to wear a face mask.
The original Employment Tribunal dismissed her claim after concluding she had failed to prove she was disabled at the relevant times, finding her evidence lacked corroboration.
The Appeal
On appeal, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT), found that the original tribunal had made multiple errors of law. These included improperly requiring the claimant’s evidence to be corroborated, irrationally averaging her therapy scores instead of focusing on periods when her symptoms were most severe and unreasonably dismissing her difficulties with driving. The tribunal also failed to consider medical evidence documenting her sleep issues.
Although the EAT dismissed one specific ground of appeal, relating to whether wearing face masks during the pandemic qualified as a “normal day-to-day activity”, it ultimately upheld the appeal. The case was remitted to a new tribunal to reconsider whether the Claimant met the definition of disability under the Equality Act 2010.
Takeaway Points
When determining whether an employee meets the definition of a disability, it’s important to recognise that their personal account of how their condition affects them can be valid evidence, even without external corroboration. This is especially relevant in cases involving mental health conditions, such as anxiety disorders, where symptoms often fluctuate. In such cases, it’s essential to focus on the periods when the symptoms are most severe, rather than averaging their impact over time.
Employers should also take particular care when considering how a condition may affect an employee’s ability to meet workplace requirements. Even when the impact isn’t immediately apparent, it may still amount to a disability under the Equality Act 2010 and warrant reasonable adjustments.
