Crossland v OCS Group Ltd & Anor (Practice and Procedure : Imposition of Deposit) [2013] UKEAT 0340_12_1701 (17 January 2013)

Crossland v OCS Group Ltd & Anor (Practice and Procedure : Imposition of Deposit) [2013] UKEAT 0340_12_1701 (17 January 2013)

The Tribunal was entitled to conclude that the requirement to carry out external patrols did not place the claimant at a substantially greater risk as a diabetic than working inside, and that the claim for reasonable adjustments had little reasonable prospect of success. The deposit order was therefore justified.

Citation
[2013] UKEAT 0340_12_1701
Parties
Appellant: K Crossland; First Respondent: OCS Group UK Ltd; Second Respondent: British Airways Interior Engineering Ltd
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
17 January 2013
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Deposit Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Reasonable Adjustments, Equality Act 2010, Employment Tribunal Procedure, Deposit Order, Disability in the Workplace
Employment Law Disability Discrimination Reasonable Adjustments Equality Act 2010 Employment Tribunal Procedure Deposit Order Disability in the Workplace

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

K Crossland

Appellant

OCS Group UK Ltd

First Respondent

British Airways Interior Engineering Ltd

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Deposit Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the requirement to carry out external patrols placed the claimant, a diabetic, at a substantial disadvantage compared to non-disabled persons
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Tribunal was correct to make a deposit order on the basis that the claim had little reasonable prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was entitled to conclude that the requirement to carry out external patrols did not place the claimant at a substantially greater risk as a diabetic than working inside, and that the claim for reasonable adjustments had little reasonable prospect of success. The deposit order was therefore justified.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.