Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Employee relationsEmployment lawEquality, diversity and inclusionDisabilityEmployment tribunals

Case round-up: Child Support Agency (Dudley) v Truman and Countrywide Estate Agents & others v Rice

by Personnel Today 4 Mar 2009
by Personnel Today 4 Mar 2009

The Employment Appeal Tribunal has confirmed that last year’s House of Lords decision on disability discrimination (London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm), which made it much harder for people with disabilities to bring disability discrimination claims, also applies to employment cases.

When deciding if a disabled person has been treated less favourably for a reason related to their disability, the disabled person must compare their treatment to that of another person (comparator). In Malcolm, the Lords considered who the comparator should be, and in doing so completely changed the law that had applied for many years.

In Malcolm, the House of Lords said that the correct analysis is to compare the way the disabled person has been treated to the way that a non-disabled person in the same situation would have been treated. If the disabled person has been dismissed for sickness absence, the correct comparator is someone without a disability who has had the same period of sickness absence. If the non-disabled person has also been dismissed, there is no discrimination.

This reversal of the previous law made it much harder for people with disabilities to bring disability related discrimination claims.

However, Malcolm was not an employment case it was about the treatment of a disabled council tenant, who was evicted by Lewisham Council when he unlawfully sublet his flat. Even though the test for disability related discrimination in the housing context is identical to that in the employment context, when the House of Lords’ decision was published, there was some debate as to whether it would also apply to employment cases.

It is now clear that it will.

Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance

Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday

OptOut
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Key points

  • The correct comparator in an employment disability-related discrimination claim is a non-disabled person in the same situation as the disabled employee
  • It is now much harder for employees to bring disability related discrimination claims
  • Employees can still bring claims for unfair dismissal if long-term absence dismissals are not handled properly
  • Employees are likely to bring claims for failure to make reasonable adjustments instead

What you should do

  • Make all reasonable adjustments that can be made to support disabled employees at work.
  • Before absence-related dismissals, continue to take reasonable steps to facilitate a return to work
  • Remember the Equality Bill may undo the changes in Malcolm.

Personnel Today

previous post
UK won’t sign Illegal Workers’ Directive
next post
Case of the month: Schultz-Hoff v Deutsche Rentenversicherung Bund Stringer and others v HM Revenue & Customs

You may also like

House of Lords votes against day-one dismissal rights

18 Jul 2025

Zero-hours employees may have to request guaranteed hours

17 Jul 2025

Trans row nurse cleared of misconduct as tribunal...

16 Jul 2025

Hugh’s Law calls for paid leave for parents...

16 Jul 2025

Beware the unintended consequences of the NDA ban

16 Jul 2025

Employees voting with feet as return-to-office pressure increases...

15 Jul 2025

Manager dismissed after covert recording with HR wins...

14 Jul 2025

Gregg Wallace case: don’t be too hasty to...

11 Jul 2025

Ministers loosen fire and rehire proposals in Employment...

10 Jul 2025

£188k tribunal award for director sacked after cardiac...

10 Jul 2025

  • Empower and engage for the future: A revolution in talent development (webinar) WEBINAR | As organisations strive...Read more
  • Empowering working parents and productivity during the summer holidays SPONSORED | Businesses play a...Read more
  • AI is here. Your workforce should be ready. SPONSORED | From content creation...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2025

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2025 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+