Probation dismissal upheld: employer did not know of disability
A business manager with chronic anxiety failed to prove that Reed Specialist Recruitment Ltd knew of her disability when they dismissed her during probation. The tribunal dismissed all claims.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #disability-discrimination
- #chronic-anxiety
- #probation-dismissal
- #misrepresentation-during-recruitment
- #alleged-harassment
- #failure-to-disclose-disability
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Business Manager from 19 April 2021 to 8 September 2021.
- The claimant had chronic anxiety, which was conceded as a disability by the respondents.
- The claimant provided false information about her employment history during recruitment.
- The claimant was dismissed during her probation period due to conduct and performance issues.
- The tribunal found that the respondents did not know and could not reasonably have known of the claimant's disability.
- The alleged harassment incidents were not found to have occurred as described by the claimant.
Timeline
-
Partner's cycling accident
The claimant's partner suffered a brain haemorrhage, leading to anger and impulse control issues that negatively impacted the claimant.
-
Diagnosis of mixed anxiety and depressive disorder
The claimant reported drinking 7 bottles of wine per week and was diagnosed with mixed anxiety and depressive disorder.
-
Reported drink-spiking incident
The claimant reported to medical professionals and police that she thought her drink had been spiked, aggravating her mental health condition.
-
Employment commenced
The claimant started work as a Business Manager at Reed Specialist Recruitment Ltd's Bury Street offices.
-
New Starter Form submitted
The claimant failed to truthfully answer questions about days lost to illness in the previous two years.
-
Alleged comment by Ms Hewitt
The claimant alleged Ms Hewitt said her life was like a live drama; the tribunal rejected this.
-
Alleged scooter fall incident
The claimant alleged Ms Hewitt laughed and made comments when she fell over a scooter; the tribunal did not find this occurred.
-
Alleged Rohypnol comment
The claimant alleged Ms Hewitt made a comment about slipping Rohypnol into a drink; the tribunal preferred Ms Hewitt's version about collagen powder.
-
Drinks party incident
The claimant behaved oddly at a work drinks party, sweating, talking fast, and invading personal space; colleagues suspected illegal drug use.
-
Claimant attended work dishevelled
Despite being told to stay home, the claimant arrived at work looking dishevelled and shaking; she was sent home as unfit to work.
-
Probation review meeting
The claimant was informed she had failed her probation due to conduct and received one week's notice of termination.
-
Employment terminated
The claimant's employment ended.
-
Grievance meeting
Mr Jones investigated the claimant's grievance; the tribunal found his conduct appropriate.
-
GP letter and ACAS application
The claimant obtained a GP letter and applied for an ACAS Early Conciliation certificate.
-
Grievance outcome letter
Mr Jones sent a detailed grievance outcome letter not upholding the claimant's complaints; the claimant did not appeal.
-
ET claim presented
The claimant presented her employment tribunal claim.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer harassed the claimant or discriminated against her because of something arising from her disability (chronic anxiety), and whether the employer knew or should have known about her disability.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims of disability discrimination and harassment.
- The employer conceded the claimant was disabled due to chronic anxiety, but the tribunal found they had no actual or constructive knowledge of it.
- The alleged harassment incidents were not proven; the tribunal preferred the employer's witnesses.
- The claimant had provided false information during recruitment and failed to obtain references, which undermined her credibility.
- No compensation was awarded as the claims failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers cannot be held liable for disability discrimination if they genuinely do not know and could not reasonably know about the disability.
- Providing false information during recruitment can severely damage your credibility in tribunal proceedings.
- If you have a disability, consider disclosing it to your employer so they can make reasonable adjustments and avoid claims of ignorance.
- Keep a clear record of any incidents you believe amount to harassment, as tribunals will weigh witness credibility carefully.
This case shows that even when an employee has a recognised disability, a tribunal will not automatically find discrimination if the employer was unaware of it. The claimant, a business manager with chronic anxiety, was dismissed during her probation period for conduct and performance issues. She argued that the employer should have known about her disability and that comments from colleagues amounted to harassment.
Why the employer won
The tribunal found that the claimant had not told Reed Specialist Recruitment Ltd about her anxiety or provided any medical evidence before her dismissal. Her behaviour at work—such as appearing dishevelled and sweating—was attributed by colleagues to possible drug use, not a disability. The tribunal also noted that the claimant had given false information on her application form and failed to provide references, which damaged her credibility. The alleged harassment incidents, including a comment about her life being a 'live drama' and a remark about Rohypnol, were not accepted by the tribunal, which preferred the evidence of the employer's witnesses.
What could have been done differently
If the claimant had disclosed her disability earlier, the employer would have been on notice and could have made adjustments. The tribunal acknowledged that the employer's conduct during the grievance process was appropriate. For employees, this case highlights the importance of being open about health conditions, especially when they may affect behaviour at work. For employers, it confirms that a lack of knowledge can be a complete defence to disability discrimination claims, provided the employer acts reasonably once they do become aware.
Why this matters
This decision reinforces that the duty to make reasonable adjustments and the protection from discrimination arising from disability only apply when the employer knows or ought to know about the disability. It also demonstrates that tribunals will scrutinise the credibility of claimants, particularly where there has been dishonesty during recruitment. Employees with hidden disabilities should consider disclosing them to ensure they receive the support and legal protections they are entitled to.
Similar cases
Unfair dismissal claim dismissed despite severe mental health: the 'reasonable period' trap
A bank employee's unfair dismissal claim was dismissed as out of time, even though the tribunal accepted her severe mental health made it not reasonably practicable to claim within the first three months.
Dismissed without a meeting or appeal: a conduct case with big reductions
A former employee of Fairview Grocers Limited was unfairly dismissed without any meeting or right of appeal, but his own conduct led to a 60% cut in compensation. He was awarded £3,752.89 in total.
Claim struck out after failure to comply with tribunal orders due to ill-health
A former employee's unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims against Marks and Spencer were struck out after she failed to comply with tribunal orders and did not actively pursue her claim.
Bus driver with Crohn's disease awarded £25,000 after employer failed to provide suitable shifts
A bus driver with over 30 years' service was awarded £25,000 after his employer repeatedly allocated shifts that did not meet his disability-related needs, causing him to soil himself at work.