The claimant worked for the respondent as a science teacher. She suffered from a physical impairment, ultimately diagnosed as fibromyalgia, together with mental distress. She argued her condition had a substantial and long-term adverse effect on her ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. The tribunal had to determine whether the claimant’s impairment amounted to a disability for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010 (the DDA 1995 applies in Northern Ireland). The tribunal held that the claimant’s impairment could not be deemed ‘long-term,’ and even if it had, in the alternative, it failed to give rise to relevant substantial effect.

The claimant successfully appealed the findings. The UKEAT held the tribunal had erred in its decision. It concluded that when determining whether the effect of the claimant’s impairments could be considered “long-term”, the tribunal focused on the question of diagnosis rather than the effects of the impairments and had adopted a narrow approach, rather than looking at the reality of risk.

As for whether the effect was “substantial”, the tribunal’s reasoning did not demonstrate that it looked to the deduced effects, assessing the impact of the claimant’s conditions, and failed to take the claimant’s doctor’s report into account, which had detailed the effects of the impairments on the claimant’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities and was plainly relevant to this issue.

The judgment of the tribunal was deemed unsafe and the case was remitted to a different tribunal for re-hearing.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5c6c3b4f40f0b647b1a86f0f/Mrs_F_Nissa_v__1__Waverly_Education_Foundation_Ltd__2__Ms_J_Newsome_UKEAT_0135_18_DA.pdf