Buyer with back condition loses disability and unfair dismissal claims over redundancy
A Buyer with 4 years' service who was made redundant while suffering from a back condition has lost her claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. The tribunal found the redundancy was genuine and the selection process fair.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #disability-discrimination
- #unfair-dismissal
- #redundancy
- #back-condition
- #occupational-health
- #access-to-work
- #time-limits
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Buyer from 25 May 2016 to 7 August 2020.
- The claimant had a back condition that was a disability under the Equality Act 2010.
- The claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy after a selection process.
- The claimant's claims of discrimination arising from disability were dismissed on the merits.
- The claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments was dismissed as out of time.
- The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed as the dismissal was fair.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment as a Buyer at Integral Powertrain Limited.
-
Road traffic collision
Claimant was involved in a road traffic collision that caused her back condition.
-
Sickness absence started
Claimant started a period of medically-certified absence due to her back condition.
-
Return to work
Claimant returned to work after absence and attended a return-to-work meeting.
-
Meeting with HR and manager
Claimant met with Simona Beardmore-Baldwin and Stuart Hale to discuss her return.
-
Occupational Health report
OH report recommended adjustments including a supportive chair.
-
Second sickness absence started
Claimant began another period of ill-health absence related to her back.
-
Return to work
Claimant returned to work after second absence.
-
Access to Work assessment
AtW assessment took place for workstation adjustments.
-
At risk of redundancy
Claimant was notified that her post was at risk of redundancy.
-
Dismissal
Claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy with immediate effect.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed by reason of redundancy, whether she was discriminated against because of something arising from her disability, and whether the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. The unfair dismissal claim failed because the redundancy was genuine and the selection process was fair. The discrimination arising from disability claims were dismissed on the merits, and the reasonable adjustments claim was dismissed as out of time, with no extension granted. No compensation was awarded.
Lessons & takeaways
- A genuine redundancy situation can be a fair reason for dismissal even if the employee has a disability, provided the selection process is fair.
- Claims for failure to make reasonable adjustments must be brought within three months of the alleged failure, or the tribunal may not have jurisdiction.
- Disability discrimination claims based on unfavourable treatment must be carefully linked to the disability to succeed.
- Representing yourself at tribunal is possible, but legal advice can help identify the strongest claims and avoid time limit pitfalls.
This case shows that a redundancy dismissal can be fair even when the employee has a disability, as long as the employer follows a proper process. The claimant, a Buyer with four years' service, suffered from a back condition that was accepted as a disability. However, when her role was made redundant, the tribunal found that the selection process was objective and fair, and that the reason for dismissal was genuine redundancy, not her disability.
What went wrong for the claimant
The claimant argued that her dismissal was discriminatory because it arose from her disability, and that the employer failed to make reasonable adjustments. However, the tribunal found that the redundancy was not because of her disability, and the alleged discriminatory treatment – such as a manager not speaking to her or questioning her – did not amount to unfavourable treatment arising from disability. Crucially, her claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments was dismissed because it was brought too late: the alleged failure occurred in 2019, but she did not bring her claim until December 2020, well outside the three-month time limit.
What the employer did right
Integral Powertrain Limited demonstrated that the redundancy was genuine, with a clear business need to reduce the number of buyers. The selection criteria were based on objective factors such as skills and performance, and the claimant was given a fair opportunity to comment. The tribunal also noted that the employer had made some adjustments for her back condition, such as providing a supportive chair, and had engaged with Access to Work.
Key takeaway for employees
This case highlights the importance of bringing discrimination claims promptly – within three months of the alleged act. It also shows that a fair redundancy process can override disability-related arguments, especially if the employer can show the dismissal was for a genuine economic reason and not because of the disability. Employees with disabilities should seek early advice to ensure they understand their rights and the strict time limits involved.
Similar cases
Strike-out and deposit order: a mixed outcome for former employee with osteoarthritis
A former employee with osteoarthritis faced strike-out of one harassment claim but was allowed to proceed with others, including unfair dismissal and disability discrimination, after a preliminary hearing.
Hotel manager's unfair dismissal claim dismissed as out of time despite ADHD
A tribunal dismissed a hotel manager's claims for unfair dismissal, disability discrimination and unpaid wages because they were presented over a month late. The judge found that his ADHD did not prevent him from bringing the claim on time.
Line Driver's discrimination claims dismissed as out of time after redundancy
An employment tribunal dismissed all discrimination claims brought by a part-time Line Driver with 4 years' service against Manheim Limited, finding they were brought too late and lacked merit. The unfair dismissal claim was withdrawn.
Cancer diagnosis and ill-health retirement: claim dismissed as too late
A driver specialist with 12 years' service had his unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims thrown out after submitting his claim form four months late, despite having been warned of the time limit.