Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

In the case of Tesco Stores Ltd v Tennant, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that an employee could not claim disability discrimination based on acts that occurred before the date on which an employment judge found that she satisfied the definition of disability. The employment judge had found that the claimant’s depression was a ‘long-term’ condition, as required by S.6 of the Equality Act 2010 (EqA), on the basis that it had lasted for the 12 months leading up to the date that she presented her claim. However, the EAT allowed the appeal by the respondent, stating that this was an incorrect interpretation of the law and that alleged acts of discrimination occurring before that date did not occur at a time when the claimant satisfied the definition of ‘disability’, and so could not have been discriminatory on that ground.

The facts in Tesco Stores Ltd v Tennant

Mrs Tennant (the claimant) was employed by Tesco Stores Ltd (the respondent) as a checkout manager in the Bicester store from 24 June 2005.  She was off sick for extended periods from September 2016 as a consequence of depression. A year later, on 11 September 2017, she brought tribunal claims of disability discrimination, harassment and victimisation, relying on a number of acts occurring between September 2016 and September 2017. The claimant argued that her depression met the definition of ‘disability’ in S.6 EqA, i.e. an impairment having a ‘substantial and long-term adverse effect on [her] ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities’. Para 2(1) of Schedule 1 to the EqA provides that an effect is ‘long-term’ for this purpose if (a) it has lasted 12 months, (b) it is likely to last 12 months or (c) it is likely to last for the rest of the person’s life.

The decision of the Employment Tribunal

The Employment Judge decided as a preliminary issue on 19 December 2018 that the claimant was disabled at the relevant time, finding that from 6 September 2016 she suffered an impairment (namely depression) which had a substantial adverse effect on her ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities and which was long-term under para 2(1)(a) of Schedule 1 to EqA 2010 because by September 2017 it had lasted 12 months.   The respondent appealed on the basis that in order to claim disability discrimination or harassment the claimant must be disabled at the time of the relevant act or acts of alleged discrimination and that para 2(1)(a) of Schedule 1 to EqA 2010 required the effect of the impairment to have lasted 12 months before she could be said to be disabled.

The decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal

The EAT allowed the appeal. Although there was no authority directly on the point, it considered that the employment judge was clearly wrong, as at any of the relevant dates – i.e. the dates of the allegedly discriminatory acts between September 2016 and September 2017, the claimant’s impairment and the adverse effects thereof had not yet lasted for at least 12 months and so she was not disabled at the relevant time. The EAT rejected the claimant’s submission that it was enough that the period during which the discriminatory acts occurred coincided with the period during which the impairment was producing the adverse effect for the purpose of S.6 EqA. In the EAT’s view, it was required to consider whether, as at the date that the acts occurred, there had been 12 months of adverse effect. It therefore held that the claimant could only bring claims of disability discrimination on the basis of acts that occurred on or after 6 September 2017.

The EAT also rejected the claimant’s argument that, if it allowed the appeal, it should remit the whole question of disability to be considered under para 2(1)(b), i.e. on the basis that at some stage during the 12 months it would have been likely that the effects would last at least a further 12 months. The employment judge had noted that the question of prognosis was not addressed in the evidence, and it had been for the claimant to establish that she was disabled and to put forward the basis for that finding. It appeared that although the claimant had relied on para 2(1)(b) in the employment tribunal, her argument under it had failed. In the absence of a cross-appeal, it would not be right for the claimant to be allowed to raise the point again on remittal.

Our solicitors’ comments on Tesco Stores Ltd v Mrs C Tennant

Caroline Lewis, a specialist employment solicitor at Redmans, commented on the case: “This case reminds organisations that it is for a claimant to demonstrate that they are disabled for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010, and the definition that they will need to meet in order to have this label. That said, organisations should still proceed with care when faced with an employee who has a condition that could potentially be considered a disability. If a claimant can demonstrate that their condition is likely to last for a period of 12 months even if it has not yet done so, this could still lead to a costly discrimination claim for an organisation. In this case, the claimant was ultimately unsuccessful because she had presented no evidence to establish the likelihood of this, but this does not mean another claimant in a similar position would not be able to”.

The decision of the Employment Tribunal in Tesco Stores Ltd v Mrs C Tennant: UKEAT/0167/19/OO can be found here.

About

Redmans Employment Team deal with employment matters for both employers and employees, including drafting employment contracts and policies, advising employers and employees on compromise agreements, handling day-to-day HR issues, advising on restructures, and handling Employment Tribunal cases for both employers and employees Call 020 3397 3603 to speak to one of the members of our employment team or email us on enquiries@redmans.co.uk. Redmans have offices in Richmond, Chiswick, Hammersmith, Fulham, Kingston, Wimbledon, Ealing, Kings Cross and Marylebone (meetings strictly by appointment only).

Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

Share →

Our awards

Request a callback

Your name

Your email

Your telephone number

Contact us

Please feel free to discuss your own position and concerns. Contact your nearest office on:

T: 020 3397 3603
E: enquiries@redmans.co.uk
W: www.redmans.co.uk

Testimonials

4.76 Average

164 Reviews

Samantha K

Absolutely brilliant thank you. Caroline Lewis is a legend

Posted 1 week ago

Anonymous

The legal advice was clear and helpful.

Posted 1 week ago

Davinder P

Good Service

Posted 2 weeks ago

Adrian V

I was using Redmans services for a Settlement Agreement. Very quick and professional service. The outcome was favourable and I was very pleased with the amendments and results. Pretty glad to recommend them for any type of legal advice.

Posted 2 weeks ago

Anonymous

Very responsive, efficient, clear and supportive. Thank you! Highly recommend.

Posted 2 weeks ago

Tiago S

Chris was always prompt to help me with legal matters that are beyond my comprehension and very helpful leasing with my former employer. I would recommend Redmans Solicitors to everyone who needs help.

Posted 2 weeks ago

Anonymous

Fast and professional advice tailored to what was needed. Thanks for your help Chris Hadrill and team.

Posted 2 weeks ago

Peter S

Really pleased with the outcome and the advice I had from Chris and Sacha.

Posted 3 weeks ago

Harika A

Redmans solicitor's helped me with my settlement agreement, Chris has been very helpful throughout the process.He was very prompt in his responses and made my settlement look simple.Special thanks to Caroline for her efficient communication, thorough explaination of contract terminology and negotiations.I highly reccommend Redmans solicitors for anyone seeking employment related legal help.

Posted 3 weeks ago

Anonymous

Good and quick service

Posted 3 weeks ago

Ricky D

Very satisfying to be assured of such attention and professionalism.

Posted 3 weeks ago

Anonymous

Excellent service - thankyou

Posted 3 weeks ago

Anonymous

Efficient, timely and friendly support and advice

Posted 3 weeks ago

Ahmed S

They are always on hand when you need them and provide support even when its not necessary.

Posted 3 weeks ago

Nemen S

Wonderful experience.Chris was very responsive and provided an excellent service. A real professional who I would recommend to anyone

Posted 3 weeks ago

Anonymous

Their guidance was clear and they provided me with all the information I required. Friendly yet professional

Posted 3 weeks ago

Anonymous

Chris @ Redmans assisted me with an employment issue. Firstly, he was very proactive in coming back to my initial enquiry and then helped to clearly lay out the options that I had in relation to my position. He then assisted with the preparation of my case, which led to a very satisfactory outcome. I would highly recommend the quality of service & professionalism offered by Redmans Solicitors.

Posted 3 weeks ago

Anonymous

Great service

Posted 3 weeks ago

Anonymous

Chris was very effective and decisive in dealing with my matter. I felt guided, and the pressure to make decisions was taken off my shoulders; he knew what needed to be done and I was happy to follow his advice. The result of the legal dispute was a great success for me. He is also kind and personable. The only thing that I would say it could be improved, is the accuracy of cost estimation at the beginning: not many activites, that could not have been forseen had to take place, but costs went up more than double in the end. Overall very good and trustworthy. I would definately recommend and use Redmans services again.

Posted 3 weeks ago

Liz P

An excellent professional service was provided by Chris Hadrill and Mel Chin. Efficient and trustworthy - would highly recommend this company.

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

Redmans Solicitors were great. They were able to advice me quickly and efficiently! I would recommend them, as a good solicitors to use.

Posted 1 month ago