Overview
The EAT in Stott v Ralli Ltd. (HHJ Auerbach) has held that a tribunal was ultimately correct to strike out an employee’s disability discrimination claim. However, the Tribunal had fallen into error by failing to make a specific finding about whether the “something” for which the employee was dismissed, being her poor performance, arose in consequence of her disability. At the time of dismissal the respondent lacked knowledge or constructive knowledge of the disability and the claim should have been struck out for this reason.
Facts
Ms Stott worked as a paralegal at a firm of solicitors. She was dismissed for poor performance during her probationary period. The tribunal found that she had anxiety and depression which amounted to a disability. The employee claimed that she had told the firm’s HR Manager about her disability in the first few days after she started. The tribunal found that this was not the case and the first time the firm was aware of any disability was when the employee submitted a grievance, after her dismissal.
Decision
The EAT (HHJ Auerbach) dismissed the appeal on the basis that the employer had no knowledge of the employee’s disability at the time of the dismissal. The EAT also observed that although the wording of the defences in sections 15 and 19 of the Equality Act 2010 is equivalent, and much of the guidance on the section 19 defence maps across to the section 15 defence, it must be remembered that the two defences are concerned with defending different types of discriminatory conduct. In particular, section 15 does not involve conduct which has a disparate group impact, and the section 19 authorities concerned with that particular aspect, are not of assistance when considering the defence to a section 15 claim.
Case
Ms C Stott v Ralli Limited – Case No: EA-2019-000772-VP (Previously UKEAT/0223/20/VP)
