Long-term sick nurse dismissed: capability process found fair despite disability
A staff nurse with 12 years' service who was dismissed after two years' sick leave and failed redeployment attempts has lost her unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a staff nurse from 19 February 2007 until her dismissal on 16 July 2019.
- She was absent from work due to ill health from 8 July 2017, except for a trial period as a trainee clinical coder in 2019.
- The respondent accepted the claimant was disabled due to transverse myelitis and dyslexia from October 2017 to 6 May 2019.
- The claimant was awarded Tier 1 ill health retirement on 23 April 2018, later upgraded to Tier 2 on 1 November 2019.
- The tribunal found the claimant was not a reliable witness and preferred the respondent's evidence.
- All claims of unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, and unauthorised deductions were dismissed.
Timeline
-
Employment commenced
Claimant started work as a spinal injury nurse (Band 5) part-time 30 hours a week.
-
Diagnosis of transverse myelitis
Claimant was diagnosed with partial transverse myelitis, an inflammation of the spinal cord.
-
Dyslexia diagnosis disclosed
Claimant told her manager she had dyslexia; an assessment was carried out in April 2016.
-
Ill health absence began
Claimant commenced a period of ill health absence that continued until her dismissal.
-
Tier 1 ill health retirement awarded
Claimant was found permanently incapable of her NHS employment but able to do other work.
-
Pathway Coordinator test
Claimant sat a test for a Pathway Coordinator role; she scored zero and was not appointed.
-
Return to work on phased basis
Claimant returned to work to prepare for a work trial as a trainee clinical coder.
-
Clinical coder test failed
Claimant scored 32% on the test; she was not appointed to the role.
-
Dismissal
Claimant was dismissed on grounds of ill health capability after a Stage 3 sickness meeting.
-
Tier 2 ill health retirement approved
Claimant was found permanently incapable of regular employment, backdated to 7 August 2019.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed and whether the respondent discriminated against her due to disability in relation to redeployment and other treatment.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims of unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, and unauthorised deductions.
Key reasons:
- The claimant was not a reliable witness; the tribunal preferred the respondent's evidence.
- The respondent had followed a proper capability procedure, including a phased return to work and redeployment attempts.
- The claimant had been awarded Tier 1 ill health retirement, indicating she was permanently incapable of her nursing role.
- No compensation was awarded.
Lessons & takeaways
- Length of absence and failed redeployment attempts can justify dismissal for capability, even for a long-serving employee.
- Tribunals will scrutinise the employer's process, but if a fair procedure is followed, the dismissal may be upheld.
- Being a litigant in person can be challenging; credibility and clear evidence are crucial.
- Ill health retirement awards can support an employer's case that the employee is incapable of their role.
A long battle with ill health
This case shows how an employer can fairly dismiss a long-serving employee on capability grounds when ill health prevents them from doing their job, provided a proper process is followed. The staff nurse had worked for the Trust for 12 years before a period of sick leave that lasted over two years. Despite attempts to return to work and explore redeployment, she was ultimately dismissed.
What the employer did right
The Trust offered a phased return, a trial in a different role (clinical coder), and considered other positions. When these failed, they held a formal capability meeting and decided dismissal was appropriate. The tribunal found this process was within the range of reasonable responses, noting that the claimant had already been awarded ill health retirement, confirming her inability to work as a nurse.
Why the claims failed
The claimant argued that the Trust had not done enough to accommodate her disability (transverse myelitis and dyslexia) and had discriminated against her. However, the tribunal did not accept her evidence, preferring the Trust's account. It found no failure to make reasonable adjustments or any discriminatory treatment. The dismissal was therefore fair.
Key takeaway for similar cases
For employees, this case highlights the importance of clear evidence and credibility. For employers, it demonstrates that a thorough capability process, including genuine redeployment efforts, can withstand legal challenge even when the employee has a disability and long service.
Similar cases
20-year manager dismissed for capability after employer refused to adjust role for disability
A Global Governance Risk and Compliance Manager with 20 years' service was unfairly dismissed and discriminated against after GlaxoSmithKline failed to make reasonable adjustments for her hand disability. The tribunal awarded £24,785 for injury to feelings.
Dismissed after 12 years due to long-term sickness: employer's redeployment efforts upheld
A Food Technology Technician with 12 years' service was fairly dismissed for capability after a long-term sickness absence, the tribunal ruled, finding the employer had properly considered redeployment and made reasonable adjustments.
NHS trust failed to redeploy disabled nursing assistant without competitive interviews
A senior nursing assistant was unfairly dismissed after her employer required her to compete for sedentary roles despite medical advice. The tribunal awarded £21,173.
Dismissed while hospitalised with sickle cell crisis: procedural failings made it unfair
A pharmacist with 20 years' service was unfairly dismissed by Whittington Health NHS Trust after being refused an extension to her notice period while hospitalised with a sickle cell crisis. The tribunal found indirect disability discrimination and a failure to make reasonable adjustments, awarding £16,884.