Employment Tribunal Decision: Disability Status Under the Equality Act
📌 In brief
The Employment Judge determined that the claimant did not meet the criteria for disability under the Equality Act 2010 due to their conditions of PTSD and photosensitivity. This ruling affects claims related to discrimination in the workplace based on disability status.
⚖️ Legal holding
A person is not considered disabled if they do not meet the criteria set out in section 6 of the Equality Act 2010.
📖 What the law says
According to the Equality Act 2010, a person is considered to have a disability if they have a physical or mental impairment that substantially and long-term adversely affects their ability to perform normal daily activities.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.
📖 Technical summary
The Employment Judge ruled that the claimant was not disabled under the Equality Act due to PTSD and photosensitivity.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Employment Judge ruled that the claimant was not a disabled person as defined by section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 due to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Photosensitivity. The decision was made at Birmingham Employment Tribunal on April 20, 2026.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Dismissed
CASE NUMBER: 6019235/2024 and 6021349/2024
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Claimant: [redacted] Respondent: [redacted]
Heard at: Birmingham by CVP
On: 20th of April 2026
Before: Employment Judge Codd
Appearances For the claimant: [redacted]
[NAME] [APPELLANT] (unrepresented) For the respondent: [redacted] JUDGMENT 1. At the relevant times the claimant was not a disabled person as defined by section 6 Equality Act 2010 because of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Photosensitivity. Employment Judge Codd
20.04.2026 Note Reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing. Written reasons will not be provided unless a party asked for them at the hearing or a party makes a written request within 14 days of the sending of this written record of the decision.
Public access to employment tribunal decisions Judgments (apart from judgments under rule 52) and reasons for the judgments are published, in full, online at www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions shortly after a copy has been sent to the claimant(s) and respondent(s) in a case.
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- Employment Tribunal Sheffield Employment Tribunal Rejects Religious Discrimination Case Against…
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rejects Unfair Dismissal Claim
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rejects Disability and Age Discrimination Claims
- Employment Tribunal Claim Dismissed: Tribunal Awards Costs for Vexatious Conduct
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rejects Unfair Dismissal Complaint
- Employment Tribunal Late Filing Costs Claimant: Unfair & Wrongful Dismissal Claims Rejected
- Employment Tribunal Late Claims Dismissed by Employment Tribunal
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rejects Unfair Dismissal and Breach of Contract Claims
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Dismisses Case for Non-Compliance
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rejects Health and Safety Claim for Lack of Jurisdictio…
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rejects Worker’s Claims Against Employer
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rejects Redundancy and Wage Claims
A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The claimant was not considered a disabled person under the Equality Act 2010 due to their conditions.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The claimant was not considered disabled under the Equality Act 2010.
Who was involved?
A worker and the Secretary of State for Justice.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court ruled based on the criteria set out in section 6 of the Equality Act 2010.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 was cited as relevant.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The claimant's conditions did not meet the legal definition of disability under section 6 of the Equality Act 2010.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
Against the claimant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone with similar conditions must meet the legal criteria to be considered disabled under the Equality Act 2010.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The nature and impact of the claimant's medical conditions were key.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions from Employment Tribunals can typically be appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.