Customer service advisor with 2 months' service fails to prove disability for discrimination claim
A tribunal ruled that a customer service advisor who worked for only two months was not disabled under the Equality Act, dismissing her disability discrimination claims against Ascensos Limited.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant worked as a Customer Service Advisor from 3/6 May 2021 until dismissal on 19 July 2021.
- The tribunal found the claimant did not have a disability within the meaning of s.6 Equality Act 2010 at the relevant time.
- The claimant's claims of discrimination arising from disability were dismissed.
- The claimant applied for reconsideration, arguing the tribunal misdirected itself and that new GP evidence would be forthcoming.
- The tribunal refused reconsideration, finding no reasonable prospect of varying the decision and that the claimant could have obtained evidence earlier.
Timeline
-
Employment start
Claimant started work as a Customer Service Advisor for Ascensos Ltd.
-
Dismissal
Claimant was dismissed from her employment.
-
GP letter obtained
Claimant obtained a letter from her GP regarding her medical conditions.
-
Case management orders
Employment Judge Cadney gave directions for disclosure of medical records and set preliminary hearing.
-
Preliminary hearing day 1
Tribunal heard evidence and argument on disability status; decision given orally that claimant not disabled.
-
Preliminary hearing day 2
Claimant applied for reconsideration of the disability decision.
-
Written reasons sent
Written reasons for the disability decision were sent to the parties.
-
Further reconsideration application
Claimant submitted additional grounds for reconsideration, stating she was seeking a further GP letter.
-
Reconsideration refused
Employment Judge Danvers refused the reconsideration application.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was disabled within the meaning of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 at the time of her employment and dismissal, and whether to reconsider that decision based on new GP evidence.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's disability discrimination claims after finding she was not disabled during her short employment.
The key reasons were:
- The claimant had only worked for about two months, and the medical evidence did not show a long-term condition with substantial adverse effects.
- The tribunal refused reconsideration, noting the claimant could have obtained the GP letter earlier and it did not change the outcome.
- No compensation was awarded as the claims were dismissed at the preliminary stage.
Lessons & takeaways
- To bring a disability discrimination claim, you must prove you were disabled at the time of the alleged discrimination, not just at the time of the hearing.
- Short service can make it harder to show a condition had a long-term and substantial adverse effect on your daily activities.
- Obtain and disclose relevant medical evidence as early as possible; tribunals are unlikely to reconsider decisions based on evidence you could have provided earlier.
- If you have a fluctuating condition, keep a diary and gather medical records to show the impact over time.
What this case shows in practice
This case highlights the importance of establishing disability status early in a claim. The claimant, a customer service advisor at Ascensos Limited, worked for only two months before being dismissed. She argued that her asthma and arrhythmia amounted to a disability, but the tribunal disagreed. The medical evidence, including a GP letter obtained months after her dismissal, did not demonstrate that her conditions had a long-term and substantial adverse effect on her daily activities.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant could have gathered medical evidence sooner. The tribunal noted that she had time to obtain a GP letter before the preliminary hearing but did not do so until after the decision. Her application for reconsideration, based on a new GP letter, was refused because the evidence was not new—it could have been obtained earlier. Additionally, the tribunal found that even the new letter did not show a substantial adverse effect.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This case serves as a reminder that disability status is assessed at the time of the alleged discrimination, not later. For employees with short service, it can be particularly challenging to prove a condition is long-term. Anyone considering a disability discrimination claim should seek legal advice and obtain comprehensive medical evidence as early as possible to avoid having their claim dismissed at a preliminary stage.
Similar cases
Former employee's unfair dismissal claim struck out as five months late
A tribunal struck out a former employee's claims because they were presented five months late, and refused to extend time even after the employee submitted additional medical evidence.
19-year employee's claims dismissed as out of time despite disabilities
A bureau operator with 19 years' service had his claims for breach of contract and discrimination thrown out because they were lodged over four years after his dismissal.
Dilated right kidney held to be a disability under Equality Act
A former employee with a dilated right kidney has been found disabled under the Equality Act, allowing his discrimination claims to proceed to a full hearing.
Senior academic ordered to pay £1,000 costs after failing to comply with tribunal order
A highly qualified academic who failed to provide a supplemental impact statement as ordered by the tribunal has been ordered to pay £1,000 in costs. The tribunal found his conduct unreasonable and that it caused a hearing to be postponed.