New Guidance for Disability Discrimination Claims After McDonald's Case
The impact of a condition on a person's ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities must be assessed objectively in disability discrimination claims.
In order to succeed in a disability discrimination claim, the Claimant must be able to show they meet the statutory definition of disabled under the Equality Act 2010.
It states a person will be disabled if:
- they have a physical or mental impairment
- the impairment has a substantial and long term adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities
In a recent decision, the Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) has issued guidance on how the impact of a condition on a person's ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities should be assessed.
Background on the Case
In the case of Primaz v Carl Room Restaurants Ltd t/a McDonald's Restaurants Ltd and others, the claimant suffered from epilepsy and vitiligo. She believed a number of things would exacerbate her conditions, including coffee, alcohol, cosmetics, cleaning products, sunlight and medications (including medications that were prescribed to her to manage her conditions). There was no medical evidence supporting her beliefs and she was acting contrary to medical advice in refusing to take medication.
An Important Decision
The Employment Tribunal had focused on the behaviour the Claimant had adopted in her attempt to manage her conditions when considering whether her conditions had an adverse effect on her day-to-day activities. The EAT has held this was wrong, and that the correct question was whether the conditions themselves had an adverse effect on the Claimant's day-to-day activities. This was held to be an objective question which could not be determined by the Claimant's subjective beliefs. The claimant only relied on physical impairments and so the tribunal had to disregard her coping mechanisms and consider the impact of her actual conditions on her day-to-day activities.
Key Takeaways from the Case
This case turns on some very specific facts which might not be widely applicable to the sorts of scenarios most employers are faced with. This said, the underlying principle may be useful: where a Claimant relies on physical ailments in order to pursue a claim for disability discrimination, the impact of those conditions must be assessed objectively by the Tribunal. This guidance may help employers prepare medical questions for occupational health advisers and medical experts, when seeking to understand the impact of a particular condition on an employee.