Dismissed for database searches: menopause symptoms not a disability, tribunal rules
An administrative officer with 18 years' service was dismissed for gross misconduct after searching her own and her neighbour's addresses on a DWP database. The tribunal upheld the dismissal and found her menopausal symptoms did not amount to a disability.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #disability-discrimination
- #unfair-dismissal
- #menopause
- #data-breach
- #gross-misconduct
- #security-breach
Key facts
- Ms Kelly was employed by the DWP from 3 March 2003 to 8 February 2021 as an administrative officer.
- On 17 September 2020, Ms Kelly searched her own address in the Searchlight database, and on 30 October 2020, she searched her neighbour's address.
- Ms Kelly admitted both searches but could not explain the second one, stating she had no recollection.
- The DWP dismissed Ms Kelly for gross misconduct on 5 February 2021, effective 8 February 2021.
- Ms Kelly suffered menopausal symptoms including hot flushes, fatigue, poor concentration, and joint pain after her HRT ceased in June 2020.
- The tribunal found Ms Kelly was not disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010 because her symptoms did not have a substantial adverse effect on her day-to-day activities.
Timeline
-
Employment start
Ms Kelly began working for the DWP as an administrative officer.
-
Mother's death
Ms Kelly's mother died, causing her grief.
-
New role
Ms Kelly obtained a new role within the DWP, which she found challenging due to lack of training.
-
HRT cessation
Ms Kelly's five-year course of HRT ended, and she did not renew it, leading to menopausal symptoms.
-
First database search
Ms Kelly searched her own address in the Searchlight database, which she later explained was a test.
-
Second database search
Ms Kelly searched her neighbour's address in the Searchlight database; she has no recollection of this.
-
First disciplinary meeting
A disciplinary meeting was held regarding the first search, resulting in a final written warning on 17 November 2020.
-
First appeal
Ms Kelly's appeal against the final written warning was upheld, reducing it to a first written warning.
-
Investigation meeting for second search
An investigation meeting was held; Ms Kelly's union representative raised her menopausal symptoms as a possible explanation.
-
Second disciplinary meeting
A disciplinary meeting was held regarding the second search, chaired by John McPherson.
-
Dismissal decision
Ms Kelly was notified of her dismissal for gross misconduct, effective 8 February 2021.
-
Appeal dismissed
Ms Kelly's appeal against dismissal was dismissed by Wendy Lawrence.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the dismissal for gross misconduct was fair, and whether the employee's menopausal symptoms amounted to a disability that would make her dismissal discriminatory.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed both claims. It held that the DWP had a genuine belief in the employee's gross misconduct based on reasonable grounds after a reasonable investigation, and dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. The employee's menopausal symptoms, while real, did not have a substantial and long-term adverse effect on her daily activities, so she was not disabled under the Equality Act 2010. No compensation was awarded.
Lessons & takeaways
- Long service does not automatically make a dismissal unfair if the employer follows a fair process and has reasonable grounds for belief in misconduct.
- Menopausal symptoms may be considered a disability if they have a substantial and long-term adverse effect on day-to-day activities; keep medical evidence to show the impact.
- Admitting a data breach but being unable to explain it weakens a defence, especially in roles with strict data security rules.
- Employers should consider whether health conditions, including menopause, might affect an employee's behaviour before deciding on dismissal.
A data breach with no explanation
An administrative officer with 18 years' service at the Department for Work and Pensions was dismissed after searching her own address and her neighbour's address on the department's Searchlight database. She admitted the first search was a test but could not explain the second, saying she had no recollection of it. The DWP treated this as gross misconduct and dismissed her.
The employee argued that her menopausal symptoms — including hot flushes, fatigue, poor concentration, and joint pain — contributed to her actions and that her dismissal was unfair and discriminatory. The tribunal accepted that she was going through a difficult time, but found that the DWP had acted reasonably.
Why the dismissal was fair
The tribunal noted that the DWP had a clear policy on database misuse and had carried out a reasonable investigation. The employee had already received a final written warning for the first search, which was later reduced to a first written warning on appeal. When the second search came to light, the employer was entitled to conclude that trust and confidence had been broken. The tribunal also found that the employee's menopausal symptoms did not have a substantial adverse effect on her day-to-day activities, so she was not disabled under the Equality Act 2010. This meant her discrimination claim failed.
What this means for similar claims
This case shows that even long-serving employees can be fairly dismissed for misconduct if the employer follows a proper process and has reasonable grounds for its decision. It also highlights the difficulty of proving disability discrimination based on menopause: the symptoms must be severe enough to have a substantial and long-term impact on daily life. Employees who believe their health condition is affecting their work should seek medical evidence and inform their employer, so reasonable adjustments can be considered.
Similar cases
Associate specialist surgeon resigned after accessing ex-wife's medical records: tribunal upholds employer's process
A Cardiff tribunal dismissed claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination by a surgeon who accessed his ex-wife's medical records without consent over 13 years. The tribunal found he resigned voluntarily and the employer's disciplinary process was fair.
Clinically extremely vulnerable manager dismissed for refusing to return to unsafe office: unfair dismissal and disability discrimination
A branch manager with 12 years' service who was clinically extremely vulnerable to COVID-19 was unfairly dismissed and discriminated against after his employer demanded he return to an office he considered unsafe. The tribunal found the disciplinary process was a sham.
Postman dismissed for abusive Facebook posts: gross misconduct dismissal upheld
A postman with 15 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after refusing to work, posting abusive comments about colleagues on Facebook, and behaving aggressively. The tribunal rejected his claims of unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, and whistleblowing detriment.
Covid-19 safety concerns: dismissal for refusing to attend work upheld
An installation engineer who refused to attend work over Covid-19 safety fears was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct. The tribunal also rejected his disability discrimination claim as out of time.