A diagnosis of ADHD or autism can contribute to the definition of and impact of disability, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has ruled.
In the case of Stedman v Haven Leisure, Harry Stedman had a diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and ADHD. He applied for a role at holiday company Haven but his application was rejected.
He made a claim to the employment tribunal of disability discrimination, but this was rejected on the basis that his impairment did not have a substantial impact on his normal day-to-day activities, and so did not meet the definition of a person with a disability for the purposes of the Equality Act.
Stedman appealed, and the EAT has now ruled that the initial tribunal erred in finding that the claimant’s impairments did not amount to a disability.
ADHD and autism
Apprentice with ADHD was fairly dismissed after lunch incident
Stedman claimed that the decision he did not have a disability was “perverse” in the light that he had submitted a report from a recognised clinician confirming his diagnosis.
The appeal also alleged that the judge in the initial tribunal had focused on what Stedman could do, rather than what he could not. The fact he could form social relationships and visit friends, and had a degree, were cited as significant facts in the initial case.
Employment Judge Holly Stout observed that a clinical diagnosis of ADHD can be used as evidence not only of an impairment but also of its impact.
“The diagnosis means they have been judged by a clinician to have significant (i.e. clinically ‘more than minor or trivial’) difficulties with the areas of functioning covered by the diagnosis,” the EAT ruled.
The judge also noted that the mental or physical impairment only needed to have “substantial” adverse effect on just one day-to-day activity.
She added that the correct comparison for the tribunal would have been between “the claimant as they are and as they hypothetically would be without the impairment”.
The EAT dismissed claims by Haven that Stedman’s appeal lacked credibility, and allowed the appeal to succeed.
The claim will now be handed back to a new tribunal to consider the evidence.
Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance
Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday
Employee relations opportunities on Personnel Today
Browse more Employee Relations jobs
