Salford NHS Primary Care Trust v Smith (Disability Discrimination) [2011] UKEAT 0507_10_2608 (26 August 2011)

Salford NHS Primary Care Trust v Smith (Disability Discrimination) [2011] UKEAT 0507_10_2608 (26 August 2011)

Neither the proposal for non-productive rehabilitative duties nor a career break constituted reasonable adjustments under the Disability Discrimination Act, as they would not prevent the PCP from placing the claimant at a substantial disadvantage. The respondent did not breach the duty of trust and confidence, and there was no constructive dismissal.

Citation
[2011] UKEAT 0507_10_2608
Parties
Applicant: Claimant; Respondent: Respondent
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
26 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal and Cross Appeal From Employment Tribunal Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed, cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Reasonable Adjustments, Constructive Dismissal, Duty of Trust and Confidence

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claimant

Applicant

Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal and Cross Appeal From Employment Tribunal Decision

  1. 1 Whether the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments under the Disability Discrimination Act
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was constructively dismissed due to breach of trust and confidence

Ratio Decidendi

Neither the proposal for non-productive rehabilitative duties nor a career break constituted reasonable adjustments under the Disability Discrimination Act, as they would not prevent the PCP from placing the claimant at a substantial disadvantage. The respondent did not breach the duty of trust and confidence, and there was no constructive dismissal.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed, cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Employment Tribunal decision overturned
  • No finding of disability discrimination