D Bangura v OCS UK & I Ltd

D Bangura v OCS UK & I Ltd

The Employment Tribunal did not err in law or act perversely in concluding that the claimant had not established, on the balance of probabilities, that he was disabled within the meaning of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. The evidence did not demonstrate a substantial and long-term adverse effect on his ability to stand for long periods or move around, and the Tribunal was entitled to weigh the evidence as it did.

Parties
Appellant: Mr D Bangura; Respondent: OCS UK&I Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Disability Discrimination, Reasonable Adjustments, Definition of Disability, Burden of Proof, Appeal on Perversity
Employment Law Discrimination Law Disability Discrimination Reasonable Adjustments Definition of Disability Burden of Proof Appeal on Perversity

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr D Bangura

Appellant

OCS UK&I Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in law in concluding the claimant was not disabled under section 6 of the Equality Act 2010
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal failed to consider the combined effects of headaches and dizziness
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal erred in its consideration of the time at which disability should be assessed

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal did not err in law or act perversely in concluding that the claimant had not established, on the balance of probabilities, that he was disabled within the meaning of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. The evidence did not demonstrate a substantial and long-term adverse effect on his ability to stand for long periods or move around, and the Tribunal was entitled to weigh the evidence as it did.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed