McLauchlan v Chubb Electronic Security Systems Ltd (Disability Discrimination : Direct disability discrimination) [2012] UKEAT 0235_12_0512 (05 December 2012)

McLauchlan v Chubb Electronic Security Systems Ltd (Disability Discrimination : Direct disability discrimination) [2012] UKEAT 0235_12_0512 (05 December 2012)

The claimant did not have a mental health impairment with a substantial adverse effect on day-to-day activities at the relevant time, so was not disabled under the Act. The alleged acts of victimisation were not causally linked to protected acts under the Disability Discrimination Act. The Tribunal’s findings were permissible and reasons compliant.

Citation
[2012] UKEAT 0235_12_0512
Parties
Appellant: A McLauchlan; Respondent: Her Majesty’s Counsel
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
05 December 2012
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Direct Disability Discrimination, Victimisation, Definition of Disability, Substantial Adverse Effect
Employment Law Disability Discrimination Direct Disability Discrimination Victimisation Definition of Disability Substantial Adverse Effect

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A McLauchlan

Appellant

Her Majesty’s Counsel

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was disabled within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act at the relevant time
  2. 2 Whether alleged mistreatment constituted victimisation under the Act

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant did not have a mental health impairment with a substantial adverse effect on day-to-day activities at the relevant time, so was not disabled under the Act. The alleged acts of victimisation were not causally linked to protected acts under the Disability Discrimination Act. The Tribunal’s findings were permissible and reasons compliant.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Application for permission to appeal to Court of Appeal refused