Dilated right kidney held to be a disability under Equality Act
A former employee with a dilated right kidney has been found disabled under the Equality Act, allowing his discrimination claims to proceed to a full hearing.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #disability-discrimination
- #dilated-right-kidney
- #physical-impairment
- #substantial-adverse-effect
- #long-term
- #preliminary-hearing
Key facts
- The claimant was diagnosed with a dilated right kidney (hydronephrosis) in December 2015.
- The claimant underwent surgery for the condition in March 2017 and again in March 2020.
- The claimant experienced recurrent pain, hospital visits, and absences from work due to his kidney condition.
- The claimant's impairment had a substantial adverse effect on his ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities, such as showering, toileting, and shopping during pain episodes.
- The impairment was long-term, lasting from 2015 to at least 2022 and likely to recur.
- The tribunal found the claimant disabled within the meaning of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010.
Timeline
-
Diagnosis of dilated right kidney
The claimant's GP diagnosed a dilated right kidney, suggestive of hydronephrosis due to a PUJ obstruction.
-
Urology consultation
Consultant urologist Miss Symons confirmed equal kidney function but a partial obstruction of the right kidney.
-
Right PUJ obstruction confirmed
Miss Symons confirmed a right-sided PUJ obstruction; no treatment required immediately but surveillance advised.
-
Surgery for PUJ obstruction
The claimant was admitted for surgery on the right PUJ obstruction; discharged on 9 March 2017.
-
Stent removal
The claimant's stent was removed; a renogram in May 2017 showed retained function and improved drainage.
-
Follow-up urology review
Mr Hughes reported no significant flank pain; renogram showed partial obstruction but stable split function.
-
Renogram results
A renogram showed equal split function; right kidney dilated but non-obstructed; small calcification noted.
-
Diagnosis of bilateral renal stones
Miss Symons diagnosed bilateral renal stones with high risk of further calcium stone formation.
-
Fit note for lower back pain
The claimant was issued a fit note for lower back pain due to his kidney condition, unfit for work for two weeks.
-
Discharge from urology
Miss Symons reported stone-free status and discharged the claimant back to GP care.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's dilated right kidney (hydronephrosis) constituted a disability under the Equality Act 2010, specifically whether it was a physical impairment with a substantial and long-term adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities.
The outcome
The tribunal ruled that the claimant was disabled within the meaning of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. The condition – a dilated right kidney diagnosed in 2015 – was a physical impairment that had a substantial adverse effect on activities like showering, toileting, and shopping during pain episodes. The effect was long-term, having lasted from 2015 to at least 2022 and being likely to recur.
The decision means the claimant's claims for disability discrimination (section 15) and reasonable adjustments will proceed to a final hearing. No compensation was awarded at this stage as it was a preliminary issue only.
Lessons & takeaways
- A physical impairment does not need to be visible or constant – episodic conditions with substantial effects can qualify as disabilities.
- Medical evidence showing a condition has lasted over 12 months and is likely to recur is key to establishing long-term effect.
- Employers should take seriously any condition that affects basic daily activities, even if the employee appears well between episodes.
What this case shows
This case demonstrates that conditions which cause intermittent but severe symptoms can still meet the legal definition of disability. The former employee had a dilated right kidney (hydronephrosis) diagnosed in 2015, requiring surgery in 2017 and 2020. Between flare-ups, he could function normally, but during episodes he experienced significant pain affecting showering, toileting, and shopping. The tribunal accepted that these effects were 'substantial' – more than minor or trivial – and 'long-term', as the condition had persisted for over seven years and was likely to recur.
What the respondent could have done differently
Green and Brown Ltd contested the disability status, arguing perhaps that the condition was not sufficiently severe or long-term. However, the medical records clearly showed a history of recurrent pain, hospital visits, and work absences linked to the kidney problem. An employer facing similar evidence should consider obtaining its own occupational health advice early. Challenging disability status without strong contrary medical evidence can be an uphill battle and may delay resolution of the underlying discrimination claims.
Why this matters
For employees with fluctuating conditions – such as kidney disease, epilepsy, or mental health issues – this decision reinforces that disability protection is not limited to those who are constantly symptomatic. The key is whether the impairment has a substantial adverse effect on normal activities when it occurs, and whether it is likely to recur. Employers should be aware that dismissing or disciplining someone for absences linked to such a condition could lead to disability discrimination claims. This preliminary ruling clears the way for a full hearing on the merits of the former employee's discrimination and reasonable adjustment claims.
Similar cases
19-year employee's claims dismissed as out of time despite disabilities
A bureau operator with 19 years' service had his claims for breach of contract and discrimination thrown out because they were lodged over four years after his dismissal.
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.
Teaching Assistant with ADHD, anxiety and depression found disabled under Equality Act
A tribunal ruled that a teaching assistant with ADHD, anxiety and depression was disabled at the time of her employment, allowing her disability discrimination claim to proceed.
Administrative officer with multiple disabilities wins right to add discrimination claim
A tribunal has allowed an administrative officer to amend her disability discrimination claim to include a section 15 claim, while refusing to add new disabilities. The respondent's strike-out applications were largely rejected.