Former employee with tendonitis, polyarthritis and cervicalgia found disabled under Equality Act
A tribunal ruled that a former Amazon employee with tendonitis, polyarthritis and cervicalgia was disabled under the Equality Act, despite the employer's occupational health reports suggesting otherwise.
1 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
- #disability-discrimination
- #physical-impairment
- #long-term-condition
- #tendonitis
- #polyarthritis
- #cervicalgia
- #occupational-health
Key facts
- The claimant had physical impairments of tendonitis in wrist, polyarthritis in shoulder, and cervicalgia in the neck.
- The impairments had a substantial adverse effect on day-to-day activities such as lifting, dressing, and sleeping.
- The effects of the impairments were long-term, lasting at least 12 months and likely to recur.
- The claimant managed his condition with over-the-counter medication and avoidance strategies.
- The respondent's occupational health reports were found to be unreliable due to incomplete medical history.
Timeline
-
Onset of symptoms
The DWP assessed Tenosynovitis with loss of power or function from this date.
-
Left wrist pain diagnosed
X-ray showed degenerative changes consistent with early osteoarthritis.
-
Orthopaedic report
One-year history of left wrist pain, likely ECU tendonitis.
-
Fit note for tendonitis and shoulder pain
Signed off with tendonitis of wrist and painful bilateral shoulder; workplace adaptations required.
-
Spinal surgeon referral
MRI revealed disk prolapse at C5/C6 causing neck pain radiating to arms and shoulders.
-
Walton Centre report
Pain in shoulders and arms for over 2 years; surgery not recommended.
-
Start of relevant period
Claimant's alleged discrimination period begins; he managed his condition with self-care.
-
First occupational health report
Occupational health found claimant fit for work with no adjustments, but duration of condition incorrectly stated as less than 12 months.
-
Second occupational health report
Duration of condition now stated as 12 months or longer; micro breaks and task rotation recommended.
-
End of relevant period
End of alleged discrimination period.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's physical impairments — tendonitis in the wrist, polyarthritis in the shoulder, and cervicalgia in the neck — amounted to a disability under section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 during the relevant period from May to September 2021.
The outcome
The tribunal decided that the claimant was disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010 during the relevant period. The key reasons were that the impairments had a substantial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities such as lifting, dressing, and sleeping, and those effects were long-term (lasting at least 12 months and likely to recur). The tribunal found the employer's occupational health reports unreliable because they failed to consider the claimant's full medical history, which showed symptoms dating back to 2014. No compensation was awarded at this preliminary stage; the case will proceed to a full hearing on the discrimination claims.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you have a physical or mental impairment that has lasted or is likely to last 12 months or more, and it substantially affects your daily life, you may be protected as disabled under the Equality Act.
- Employers should ensure occupational health reports are based on complete medical histories, not just recent symptoms, to avoid unreliable assessments.
- Even if you manage your condition with medication or avoidance strategies, you can still be considered disabled if the underlying impairment would have a substantial effect without those measures.
- The relevant period for a disability discrimination claim is the time of the alleged discriminatory acts — you need to show you were disabled at that time.
- Representing yourself is possible, but having medical evidence that clearly documents the duration and impact of your condition is crucial.
What this case shows in practice
This case highlights how tribunals assess disability under the Equality Act, particularly when an employer's own occupational health reports are flawed. The former employee had a long history of wrist, shoulder and neck problems — tendonitis, polyarthritis and cervicalgia — dating back to 2014. Despite this, Amazon's occupational health reports in 2021 initially stated his condition had lasted less than 12 months, and only later acknowledged it was long-term. The tribunal found those reports unreliable because they omitted key parts of his medical history.
The claimant managed his symptoms with over-the-counter painkillers and by avoiding certain activities, but the tribunal accepted that without these measures his impairments would have had a substantial effect on daily tasks like lifting, dressing and sleeping. This is an important point: the law looks at the underlying impairment, not just how the person copes with it.
What the employer could have done differently
Amazon could have avoided this preliminary defeat by ensuring its occupational health provider had access to the claimant's full medical records. The first report in August 2021 incorrectly stated the condition had lasted less than 12 months, which contradicted the medical evidence showing symptoms from 2014. A more thorough review would have revealed the long-term nature of the impairments. Employers should treat occupational health assessments as only one piece of the puzzle and cross-check them against other medical evidence.
Why this result matters
The decision does not mean Amazon is liable for discrimination — that will be decided at a later full hearing. But it clears a key hurdle for the claimant. For others in similar situations, this case shows that a tribunal will look carefully at the whole picture, including historical medical records, when deciding if someone is disabled. It also demonstrates that even if you have not been signed off work continuously, a pattern of recurring symptoms over years can satisfy the 'long-term' test.
Similar cases
SEO Lead's constructive dismissal claim fails: tribunal finds no disability or breach
A tribunal rejected a constructive dismissal and disability discrimination claim by a Harrods SEO Lead, finding he was not disabled and that the employer's performance management was not a breach of contract.
Meter reader with 16 years' service unfairly dismissed for ill health capability
A meter reader who was dismissed while on long-term sick leave after a motorbike accident has won his unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claim. The tribunal found that Morrison Data Services Ltd failed to obtain an up-to-date occupational health report before deciding to dismiss.
Security officer dismissed after back injury: tribunal finds unfair dismissal and disability discrimination
A security officer with six years' service was unfairly dismissed after a back injury. The tribunal also found that CIS Security Ltd failed to make reasonable adjustments and discriminated against him arising from his disability.
Dismissed after 10-month absence: employer's reasonable adjustments were enough
An employment tribunal has upheld the dismissal of an assistant branch manager with 28 years' service who was absent for 10 months with anxiety. The employer had offered multiple adjustments but the claimant insisted on a customer ban.