Harrison v Queen's University Belfast [2013] NIIT 1559_12IT (10 April 2013)

Harrison v Queen's University Belfast [2013] NIIT 1559_12IT (10 April 2013)

The tribunal found that the respondent's withdrawal of the job offer was based on unsatisfactory medical evidence, unsatisfactory references, and false information on the application form, not on the claimant's disability. The respondent considered reasonable adjustments but found them unfeasible for the role in question. The claimant failed to establish facts from which the tribunal could conclude that discrimination occurred. The claims for direct disability discrimination, disability-related discrimination, and failure to make reasonable adjustments were dismissed.

Citation
[2013] NIIT 1559_12IT
Parties
Claimant: Dylan Stuart Harrison; Respondent: Queen’s University Belfast
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
10 April 2013
Procedural Posture
Employment Tribunal / Final Judgment
Outcome
claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Direct Disability Discrimination, Disability Related Discrimination, Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments, Burden of Proof, Statutory Justification, Reasonable Adjustments, Comparators
Employment Law Disability Discrimination Direct Disability Discrimination Disability Related Discrimination Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments Burden of Proof Statutory Justification Reasonable Adjustments +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dylan Stuart Harrison

Claimant

Queen’s University Belfast

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Tribunal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was treated less favourably for a reason relating to his disability contrary to Section 3A(1)(a) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 by withdrawal of a job offer.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was treated less favourably on the ground of his disability contrary to Section 3A(5) of the Act.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent can rely on any justification under Section 3A of the Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal found that the respondent's withdrawal of the job offer was based on unsatisfactory medical evidence, unsatisfactory references, and false information on the application form, not on the claimant's disability. The respondent considered reasonable adjustments but found them unfeasible for the role in question. The claimant failed to establish facts from which the tribunal could conclude that discrimination occurred. The claims for direct disability discrimination, disability-related discrimination, and failure to make reasonable adjustments were dismissed.

Court Disposition

claims dismissed