Disability discrimination case – What is a ‘long term’ impairment?

Posted on

In order for a person to be viewed as disabled in an employment law context, they must suffer from a physical or mental impairment that is both substantial and ‘long term’ – but what does long term mean and at what time should that be assessed?

The Court of Appeal tackled that issue in an important test case (All Answers Ltd v Mr W and Another).

The case concerned two workers employed by the same company who each lodged disability discrimination claims. Both were said to suffer from depression and one of them from post-traumatic stress disorder.

They contended, amongst other things, that they were subjected to less favourable treatment when their employer shifted their office seating positions so that they were no longer close to each other, resulting in feelings of isolation.

Following a preliminary hearing, an Employment Tribunal (ET) found that they were disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010.

It did so on the basis that they suffered from mental impairments that had a substantial and long term adverse impact on their ability to carry out normal day to day activities.

That conclusion was later confirmed by the Employment Appeal Tribunal.

In upholding the employer’s appeal against that outcome, the Court noted that the Act defines a long term impairment as one that has lasted for at least 12 months or is likely to last for at least 12 months.

In carrying out such an assessment, ETs are not entitled to take into account events that occur after the alleged discrimination and must consider whether the Claimant met that test at the time of the alleged discriminatory act.

The wording of the ET’s decision, in particular its frequent use of the present tense, indicated that it had not looked back to the position that pertained when the discrimination was alleged to have occurred.

The clear impression was that it had instead considered whether the workers were disabled as at the date of the hearing.

There was a marked absence in the ET’s decision of any reference to the dates on which the alleged discriminatory acts were said to have taken place.

It erred in law in failing to ask itself whether, as at the date of those acts, the substantial adverse effects of the mental impairment from which the workers suffered were likely to last for at least 12 months.

The preliminary issue was sent back to the ET for redetermination in the light of the Court’s ruling.

We are experienced in handling claims involving disability discrimination claims. Please click here to contact our expert team for advice.

Rachel Fereday

Partner and Head of Litigation & Employment

Contact a member of the team  

Here at Awdry Law we use cookies to:
- improve our website performance;
- help you share our content across your social media networks; and
- personalise our advertisements to you.

To accept our cookies please click the button below, or for further details and the chance to specify your cookie preferences please click ‘more information’.

You can change your preferences at any time by visiting the “Cookies Preferences” page, which can be found via our footer. View our Privacy and Cookies policies for full details.