Aderemi v London and South Eastern Railway Ltd (Disability Discrimination : Disability) [2012] UKEAT 0316_12_0612 (6 December 2012)

Aderemi v London and South Eastern Railway Ltd (Disability Discrimination : Disability) [2012] UKEAT 0316_12_0612 (6 December 2012)

The Tribunal erred in law by focusing on the claimant's abilities rather than inabilities, failing to apply the correct comparative approach, and not properly considering whether the impairment had a substantial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities, including relevant work activities. The case must be remitted for rehearing with the correct legal approach.

Citation
[2012] UKEAT 0316_12_0612
Parties
Claimant: Claimant (station assistant at London Bridge); Respondent: Respondent (employer)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
06 December 2012
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal Tribunal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; case remitted for rehearing
Legal Topics
Disability Discrimination, Unfair Dismissal, Definition of Disability, Substantial Adverse Effect, Normal Day to Day Activities
Employment Law Equality Law Disability Discrimination Unfair Dismissal Definition of Disability Substantial Adverse Effect Normal Day to Day Activities

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claimant (station assistant at London Bridge)

Claimant

Respondent (employer)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal Tribunal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant was disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Tribunal applied the correct legal test for disability
  3. 3 Whether the dismissal was unfair under section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal erred in law by focusing on the claimant's abilities rather than inabilities, failing to apply the correct comparative approach, and not properly considering whether the impairment had a substantial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities, including relevant work activities. The case must be remitted for rehearing with the correct legal approach.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; case remitted for rehearing

Orders

  • Remitted to a Tribunal for rehearing on the question of disability under the Equality Act 2010
  • Reconsideration of the unfair dismissal claim in light of the disability finding