M andClaimantHome office SITTING AT: London CentralRespondent
Before
Employment Judge G SmartDate 24 January 2024
JUDGMENT
On hearing the Claimant in person and submissions from Mr. Christohper Milsom (Counsel) for the Claimant and Ms Isobel Buchanan (Counsel) for the Respondent:[1]The Claimant’s claims for direct age discrimination and direct disability discrimination are dismissed following their withdrawal during submissions on 18 January 2024.[2]The Claimant was disabled with dyslexia, dyspraxia and psychotic depression within the meaning of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 at all relevant dates, namely 16 June 2020, 10 July 2020 and 21 December 2020.[3]The Home Office had knowledge of disability for the purpose of the section 15 and s20/21 Equality Act 2010 claims but not of disadvantage for the purpose of the section 20/21 claims;[4]The claim for a failure to make reasonable adjustments in accordance with sections 20 and 21 of the equality Act 2010 is not well founded and is dismissed.[5]The Claimant of unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability in breach of section 15 Equality Act 2010 is not well founded and is dismissed. Case Number:2206595/2020 The reasons for this decision were given orally at a hearing. Written reasons will not be provided unless they have been requested in writing by any of the parties within 14 days of the date this judgment was sent to the parties.
REASONS
[1]This hearing was originally heard on 21 – 29 November 2023. However, due to a number of difficulties with disclosure and agreeing the bundle of documents, as well as the need to locate a previous Tribunal claim that was heard some years ago, the case needed to be adjourned until 18 January 2024.[2]The note of the previous hearing was sent to the parties, which is annexed to this judgment at annex 2. The issues to be determined.[3]The issues to be determined were clarified at the outset of the first part of the final hearing and are annexed to this judgment as annex 1.[4]The only time limit issues pursued were associated with the direct Age discrimination complaints. The Age discrimination complaints were withdrawn by the Claimant during submissions. Consequently, no time points or age discrimination claims needed to be decided.[5]This meant that the only issues to be determined that remained, were whether the Claimant was disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010 at the agreed relevant dates, the allegations of unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability and the allegation of a failure to make reasonable adjustments. DISABILITY The issues to be decided[6]The Respondent conceded disability for dyslexia before the first part of the final hearing and dyspraxia during the first part of the final hearing.[7]The Respondent conceded that the Claimant had the impairment of psychotic depression and that this impaired the Claimant, but denied this was a disability based on all other parts of the test.[8]The issues to be decided therefore were: 8.1. Was the Claimant’s impairment of psychotic depression long term? Case Number: 2206595/2020