Business analyst dismissed after 16 months of sick leave: capability dismissal upheld
A tribunal has ruled that Bud Systems Limited fairly dismissed a business analyst who had been on sick leave for 16 months with anxiety and depression. All discrimination claims also failed.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Business Analyst/Product Owner from 9 November 2017 until dismissal on 24 November 2021.
- The claimant had a disability due to anxiety and depression, accepted by the respondent from November 2020.
- The claimant was placed on a performance improvement plan on 14 July 2020, which was suspended three days later when he went on sick leave.
- The claimant never returned to work after July 2020 and was dismissed for capability on 24 November 2021 after 16 months of absence.
- The respondent obtained two occupational health reports, but the claimant did not engage with return-to-work meetings.
- The tribunal found the dismissal was fair and within the range of reasonable responses, and all discrimination claims failed.
Timeline
-
Employment commenced
Claimant started work as a Business Analyst (later referred to as Product Owner) at Bud Systems Limited.
-
Claimant disclosed mental health difficulties
Claimant emailed Ben Garfitt stating he was 'a bit broken' and asked to avoid discussing his feelings, but did not disclose a disability.
-
Performance improvement plan (PIP) imposed
Claimant was placed on a PIP requiring office attendance, 9-5 hours, and full workload. He did not raise disability concerns at the meeting.
-
Claimant emailed about anxiety and depression
Claimant emailed the respondent stating he was going to the doctor and mentioned anxiety and depression for the first time.
-
PIP suspended and sick leave began
Respondent suspended the PIP and claimant started sick leave, never returning to work.
-
First occupational health report
Dr Irons reported that claimant had anxiety and depression, with a hopeful return to work in the near future with a phased return.
-
First ET1 claim presented
Claimant presented his first employment tribunal claim.
-
Second occupational health report
Dr King reported claimant was not fit for work and prognosis for return was uncertain, dependent on therapy.
-
Dismissal
Claimant was dismissed with six weeks' notice on grounds of capability, effective date of termination 5 January 2022.
-
Second ET1 claim presented
Claimant presented a second claim following his dismissal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the dismissal for capability was fair, and whether the employer discriminated against the employee because of his disability by failing to make reasonable adjustments, direct discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, and harassment.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims, including unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. The key reason was that the employer had obtained two occupational health reports, the employee did not engage with return-to-work meetings, and the decision to dismiss fell within the range of reasonable responses. No compensation was awarded as the respondent won.
Lessons & takeaways
- Long-term sickness absence can lead to fair dismissal if the employer follows a proper process and obtains up-to-date medical evidence.
- Failing to engage with return-to-work meetings can weaken a claim of unfair dismissal, as the employer may be seen as having done enough.
- Disability discrimination claims require evidence that the employer knew or ought to have known about the disability and failed to make reasonable adjustments.
- Representing yourself at tribunal can be challenging; it is important to comply with directions and provide evidence on time.
This case shows how employment tribunals approach capability dismissals when an employee has been on long-term sick leave. The claimant, a business analyst with four years' service, was placed on a performance improvement plan in July 2020 but went on sick leave three days later and never returned. After 16 months of absence, the employer dismissed him for capability, relying on two occupational health reports that gave an uncertain prognosis.
What the tribunal considered
The tribunal focused on whether the employer's decision was within the 'range of reasonable responses' – a key test for fairness. The employer had suspended the PIP, obtained medical reports, and invited the claimant to return-to-work meetings, which he did not attend. The tribunal found that the employer had done enough and that the dismissal was fair. All discrimination claims also failed because the employer had made reasonable adjustments (such as suspending the PIP) and there was no evidence of unfavourable treatment because of disability.
What could have been done differently
The claimant might have strengthened his case by engaging with the employer's attempts to discuss a return to work and by providing his own medical evidence. He also struggled with tribunal directions, which may have affected the presentation of his case. For employers, this case confirms that a structured process – including obtaining medical reports and offering support – can defend against unfair dismissal claims, even when the employee has a disability.
Why this matters
This decision highlights that long-term absence does not automatically make a dismissal unfair, provided the employer acts reasonably. It also shows that disability discrimination claims require more than just having a disability; the employer must have failed in its duty to make adjustments or treated the employee unfavourably because of the disability. Employees in similar situations should consider engaging with occupational health and return-to-work discussions to protect their position.
Similar cases
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.
Support worker dismissed after 6 months' sick leave: employer's decision upheld
A support worker with depression was dismissed after six months' sick leave. The tribunal upheld the dismissal, finding the council acted reasonably and proportionately.