PTSD after workplace attack: when does a mental impairment become a disability?
A former employee who suffered PTSD after a violent attack at work was not considered disabled under the Equality Act until four months later, the tribunal ruled. No compensation was awarded.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #disability-discrimination
- #long-term-effect
- #ptsd
- #stress-anxiety
- #occupational-health
- #acute-crisis-reaction
Key facts
- The claimant was attacked by a colleague on 22 June 2020 involving racist language and sexual assault.
- The claimant suffered from stress, anxiety and PTSD following the attack.
- The respondent conceded the claimant was disabled from 6 November 2020 but not before.
- The GP diagnosed an acute crisis reaction on 29 June 2020.
- The Occupational Health report of 13 July 2020 did not mention PTSD.
- The tribunal found that as at 13 July 2020, the adverse effects were not likely to last 12 months.
Timeline
-
Workplace attack
The claimant was violently attacked by a colleague involving racist language and sexual assault.
-
Returned to work
The claimant returned to work for two days after the attack.
-
Special leave
The claimant took special leave on 25 and 26 June 2020 due to colleague conduct.
-
GP consultation
The claimant saw her GP and was diagnosed with an acute crisis reaction; she self-certified as unfit for work for a week.
-
Occupational Health report
Occupational Health reported severe anxiety and moderate depression but did not mention PTSD.
-
GP appointment
The claimant had a GP appointment; no significant change noted.
-
Second Occupational Health report
Occupational Health raised the possibility of PTSD due to lack of improvement; respondent conceded disability from this date.
-
Tribunal hearing
The tribunal heard the preliminary issue of disability status.
-
Reasons given
Employment Judge C Sharp provided written reasons for the judgment.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's mental impairment (stress, anxiety and PTSD) was likely to last for 12 months or more as at the date of the alleged discrimination, 13 July 2020, so that she would be protected as a disabled person under the Equality Act 2010.
The outcome
The tribunal decided that the claimant was not disabled at the material time of 13 July 2020. The key reason was that the medical evidence available then (GP diagnosis of acute crisis reaction and Occupational Health report of severe anxiety and moderate depression) did not suggest the effects would last 12 months. The respondent conceded disability from 6 November 2020 when a second Occupational Health report raised the possibility of PTSD.
No compensation was awarded as the claim on disability discrimination failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- The date of the alleged discrimination is crucial: you must show you were disabled at that time, not just later.
- Medical evidence from the relevant period is key – a later diagnosis of a long-term condition may not help if earlier reports pointed to a short-term reaction.
- Occupational Health reports that do not mention a long-term condition can be used by employers to argue you are not disabled.
- If your symptoms change or worsen, seek updated medical evidence promptly to support your disability status.
- The test for 'likely to last 12 months' is objective and based on what could reasonably be predicted at the time, not what actually happened later.
When a workplace attack leads to a disability dispute
This case shows how the timing of a disability diagnosis can make or break a discrimination claim. The claimant was violently attacked by a colleague on 22 June 2020, involving racist language and sexual assault. She returned to work briefly but then took special leave and saw her GP, who diagnosed an acute crisis reaction. An Occupational Health report on 13 July 2020 noted severe anxiety and moderate depression but did not mention PTSD. The Department for Work and Pensions conceded she was disabled from 6 November 2020, when a second report raised the possibility of PTSD, but not before.
What the tribunal decided
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was disabled at the date of the alleged discrimination, 13 July 2020. Applying the test from Boyle v SCA Packaging – whether the adverse effect 'could well happen' to last 12 months – the judge looked at the evidence available at that time. The GP had diagnosed an acute crisis reaction, which is a short-term response to a traumatic event. The Occupational Health report did not mention PTSD and the claimant had returned to work for two days. The judge concluded that a reasonable prediction on 13 July 2020 was that the effects would not last 12 months. The later diagnosis of PTSD did not change the position for that earlier date.
What this means for similar claims
This case is a reminder that the legal definition of disability requires a long-term effect – one likely to last at least 12 months. For mental health conditions that develop after a traumatic event, early medical reports are critical. If those reports describe an acute reaction rather than a chronic condition, the employer may successfully argue that the employee is not disabled at that time. Employees who experience a traumatic event at work should seek ongoing medical support and ensure that any deterioration in their condition is documented promptly. The Department for Work and Pensions acted reasonably in conceding disability once PTSD was identified, but the earlier period remained unprotected.
Similar cases
Traffic engineer dismissed after long-term sickness: capability decision upheld
A traffic engineer with PTSD and chronic pain was fairly dismissed for capability after years of sickness absence and negligible work output, the Watford tribunal has ruled.
Dismissed after refusing redeployment: a capability decision that passed the fairness test
A Housing Solutions Assistant with PTSD was fairly dismissed after a lengthy sickness absence when he refused all redeployment options, the tribunal has ruled.
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.