Stress and anxiety from COVID-19 and bereavement not a disability, tribunal rules
A housing officer who claimed disability discrimination after being dismissed while signed off with stress and anxiety has lost her case. The tribunal found her reactions were normal responses to adverse life events, not a mental impairment.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #preliminary-issue
- #disability-definition
- #mental-impairment
- #stress-and-anxiety
- #covid19
- #no-formal-diagnosis
Key facts
- The claimant suffered stress and anxiety due to bereavement, work changes, and COVID-19 concerns.
- She was signed off work from March 2021 until dismissal on 13 August 2021.
- She did not take anti-depressant medication or receive any formal diagnosis of a mental health condition.
- Her day-to-day activities were limited only by COVID-19 restrictions and personal caution, not by an impairment.
- The tribunal found her reactions were within the range of normal responses to adverse life events.
Timeline
-
Bereavement
The claimant's uncle died, causing low mood.
-
Signed off work
Claimant felt stressed and run down, signed off by GP.
-
COVID-19 lockdowns begin
Claimant worried about catching COVID-19 due to history of chest infections.
-
Returned to work from home
Claimant returned to work remotely.
-
Resisted face-to-face sign-ups
Claimant objected to carrying out new tenant sign-ups involving face-to-face contact.
-
Signed off with work-related stress
Claimant's relationship with line manager deteriorated; she was signed off and remained absent.
-
Dismissal
Claimant was dismissed from employment.
-
Preliminary hearing
Tribunal decided claimant was not disabled at the relevant time; disability discrimination claims struck out.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's stress and anxiety amounted to a disability under the Equality Act 2010. To be disabled, a person must have a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's disability discrimination claim at a preliminary hearing, ruling she was not disabled during the relevant period (March 2021 to August 2021).
The key reasons were:
- The claimant had no formal diagnosis of a mental health condition and had not taken anti-depressant medication or received psychological therapy.
- Her day-to-day activities were limited only by COVID-19 restrictions and her own caution, not by an impairment. She continued to walk her dog and have shopping delivered, which were common responses to the pandemic.
- Her stress and anxiety were normal reactions to bereavement, work changes, and the pandemic, not a mental impairment.
No compensation was awarded as the claim was struck out.
Lessons & takeaways
- To claim disability discrimination, you must show you have a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial (more than minor) and long-term (lasting or likely to last 12 months) adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities.
- A formal diagnosis is not always required, but medical evidence of an impairment is crucial. Tribunals will look at whether your condition goes beyond normal reactions to life events.
- If your limitations are mainly due to external factors like COVID-19 restrictions, rather than an impairment, you may not meet the disability definition.
- When preparing an impact statement, focus on how your condition affects day-to-day activities like walking, socialising, or working, not just your complaints about treatment.
This case highlights the high bar for establishing a mental health disability under the Equality Act 2010, particularly when the condition is stress and anxiety arising from common life events.
What happened
The claimant, a housing officer, experienced stress and anxiety after a bereavement, work changes, and worry about COVID-19 due to a history of chest infections. She was signed off work from March 2021 and dismissed in August 2021. She claimed disability discrimination, arguing her stress and anxiety were a disability.
Why the claim failed
The tribunal found that while the claimant was genuinely stressed and anxious, her reactions were within the range of normal responses to adverse events. She had no formal diagnosis, no medication, and no specialist referrals. Her day-to-day activities were limited only by COVID-19 restrictions and personal caution, not by an impairment. The tribunal noted that many people experienced similar anxiety during the pandemic.
What this means for similar claims
Employees seeking to rely on stress or anxiety as a disability need to provide clear medical evidence of an impairment that goes beyond normal reactions. A GP note saying 'stressed' is unlikely to be enough. The case also shows that tribunals will consider the context — if limitations are shared by the general population due to external factors, they may not count as substantial adverse effects. For employers, this case is a reminder that not every period of stress-related absence will meet the disability threshold, but each case turns on its own facts.
Similar cases
Delivery driver with carpal tunnel syndrome not disabled under Equality Act
A delivery driver who had carpal tunnel syndrome surgery and returned to work without sickness absence was found not to be disabled. The tribunal dismissed her unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims.
Unfair dismissal claim struck out for being 12 days late
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim was dismissed because she presented it 12 days after the three-month deadline. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for her to have claimed on time.
Funeral director with 31 years' service fails to establish disability status
An employment tribunal has ruled that a funeral director with 31 years' service was not a disabled person under the Equality Act, dismissing his disability discrimination claims.
Head of Maintenance loses constructive dismissal claim against Roehampton University
A tribunal has dismissed a head of maintenance's constructive unfair dismissal claim against Roehampton University, finding that the employer's handling of workplace incidents did not breach the implied term of trust and confidence.