Dismissed after miscarriage and husband's death: employer failed to get medical evidence
An accounts manager who suffered a miscarriage and lost her husband in quick succession was unfairly dismissed by First Call Contract Services Limited. The tribunal awarded £72,948.30 for unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, and indirect sex discrimination.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #long-term-sickness
- #disability-discrimination
- #indirect-sex-discrimination
- #failure-to-obtain-occupational-health
- #childcare-disparity
- #flexible-working-refused
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as an Accounts Manager from 26 February 2018 until 18 December 2020.
- She suffered from anxiety, depression and stress following a miscarriage and the death of her husband in late 2019.
- The claimant was signed off sick from January 2020 and repeatedly requested an occupational health referral, which the respondent never arranged.
- The respondent dismissed the claimant on grounds of ill-health/capability on 7 December 2020, effective 18 December 2020.
- The claimant had indicated a realistic return date of January 2021 with part-time hours and working from home.
- The respondent had a practice of requiring full-time on-site work, which disproportionately disadvantaged women with childcare responsibilities.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment as Accounts Manager.
-
Flexible working request refused
Respondent refused claimant's request to reduce hours from 45 to 40 per week.
-
Miscarriage discovered
Claimant had a silent miscarriage; informed respondent.
-
Husband died
Claimant's husband was killed in a road traffic accident.
-
Sick leave started
Claimant informed respondent she was unable to return to work due to mental health.
-
GP requested occupational health
Fit note included request for employer to refer claimant to occupational health.
-
Claimant proposed return plan
Claimant wrote to respondent stating she could return in January 2021 with part-time hours and flexible working.
-
Claimant reiterated return plan
Claimant confirmed she could return in January 2021 with 15-20 hours per week.
-
Dismissal letter sent
Respondent dismissed claimant on grounds of ill-health, citing inability to provide a definitive return date.
-
Employment ended
Effective date of termination.
-
Appeal refused
Claimant's appeal against dismissal was rejected.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's dismissal for capability (long-term sickness) was unfair, whether it amounted to discrimination arising from disability, and whether the employer's requirement for full-time on-site work indirectly discriminated against women.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld all three claims: unfair dismissal, discrimination arising from disability, and indirect sex discrimination.
The key reasons were:
- The employer failed to obtain occupational health advice despite the claimant's GP requesting it.
- The employer dismissed the claimant even though she had proposed a realistic return date with part-time hours and home working.
- The employer's practice of requiring full-time on-site work placed women at a particular disadvantage due to childcare responsibilities.
Compensation breakdown:
- Net past losses plus interest: £18,647.64
- Future losses: £11,288.16
- Injury to feelings plus interest: £36,535.89
- Loss of statutory rights: £250
- Total after grossing up: £72,948.30
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers should always obtain up-to-date medical evidence, such as an occupational health report, before making a capability dismissal.
- A rigid requirement for full-time on-site work can amount to indirect sex discrimination if it disproportionately disadvantages women with childcare responsibilities.
- Employees who are absent due to disability-related sickness are protected from discrimination arising from disability, including dismissal.
- Proposing a realistic return date with adjustments can strengthen a claim for unfair dismissal if the employer ignores it.
- Employers should consider flexible working requests seriously, especially when they could facilitate a return to work after long-term sickness.
A tragic personal loss met with an inflexible employer
The claimant, an accounts manager with nearly three years' service, suffered a miscarriage in November 2019 and her husband was killed in a road traffic accident just weeks later. She was signed off sick from January 2020 with anxiety, depression, and stress. Despite her GP repeatedly requesting an occupational health referral, First Call Contract Services Limited never arranged one.
By September 2020, the claimant had proposed a return to work in January 2021 on a part-time basis with home working. The employer, however, insisted on full-time on-site work and dismissed her in December 2020, citing an inability to provide a definitive return date. The tribunal found that the employer's failure to obtain medical advice and its rigid working practices made the dismissal unfair and discriminatory.
What the employer could have done differently
The tribunal highlighted several failures. First, the employer ignored the GP's request for an occupational health referral, which would have provided up-to-date medical evidence. Second, it dismissed the claimant despite her clear proposal for a phased return. Third, its requirement for full-time on-site work was a provision, criterion, or practice that disproportionately disadvantaged women, who are more likely to have childcare responsibilities. The tribunal found that this indirect sex discrimination was not justified.
Why this case matters
This case is a stark reminder that employers must engage properly with employees on long-term sick leave, especially when the absence is linked to a disability. Failing to obtain medical evidence and insisting on inflexible working arrangements can lead to claims for unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, and indirect sex discrimination. The substantial award of over £72,000 reflects the seriousness of these failures, including injury to feelings and future losses.
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.
20-year manager dismissed for capability after employer refused to adjust role for disability
A Global Governance Risk and Compliance Manager with 20 years' service was unfairly dismissed and discriminated against after GlaxoSmithKline failed to make reasonable adjustments for her hand disability. The tribunal awarded £24,785 for injury to feelings.
Production operative dismissed during long-term sick leave: unfair dismissal claim fails on service
A production operative who was dismissed while on sick leave for plantar fasciitis and depression lost her unfair dismissal claim because she had less than two years' service. All disability discrimination claims were also dismissed.
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.