Warehouse operative not disabled: tribunal rejects PTSD, pain and hip condition claims
A warehouse operative who claimed disability discrimination due to PTSD, abdominal pain and a necrotic hip has had her case dismissed after the tribunal found she was not disabled at the material time.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Key facts
- The claimant did not attend the hearing to give evidence.
- The claimant was employed as a warehouse operative from 22 November 2021.
- The claimant alleged three conditions: PTSD, abdominal pain, and necrotic hip.
- The claimant had previously been found to have exaggerated symptoms in other litigation.
- The claimant's disability impact statement was unsigned and given little weight.
- The respondent's occupational health advisors did not consider the claimant disabled at the material time.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant commenced employment with Great Bear Distribution Ltd as a warehouse operative.
-
Alleged dismissal
Claimant says she was dismissed on this date.
-
Return to work
Claimant returned to work after alleged dismissal.
-
Last alleged discriminatory act
The last date of alleged discrimination in the proceedings.
-
Strike out warning
Tribunal gave claimant opportunity to show why unfair dismissal claim should not be struck out for lack of service.
-
Strike out judgment
Employment Judge S Moore struck out the unfair dismissal claim.
-
Preliminary hearing on disability
Hearing to determine whether claimant was disabled under s.6 Equality Act 2010.
-
Reserved judgment on disability
Employment Judge Ryan found claimant was not disabled at the material time.
-
Reconsideration refused
Applications for reconsideration of disability decision and deposit orders refused.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was disabled under the Equality Act 2010 at the time of the alleged discrimination (January to June 2022), so that it had jurisdiction to hear her disability discrimination claims.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the disability discrimination claims because the claimant was not a disabled person at the material time.
Key reasons:
- The claimant did not attend the hearing to give evidence, and her unsigned disability impact statement was given little weight.
- Medical records did not demonstrate a substantial and long-term adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities.
- The respondent's occupational health advisors did not consider the claimant disabled.
No compensation was awarded as the claims were dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- To bring a disability discrimination claim, you must prove you are disabled under the Equality Act 2010 – having a medical condition is not enough; it must have a substantial and long-term adverse effect on daily activities.
- Attending the hearing and giving evidence is crucial – failing to attend can lead to your evidence being given little weight.
- Medical records alone may not be sufficient; you need to show how your condition actually affects your day-to-day life.
- If you have previously exaggerated symptoms in other litigation, this may affect your credibility in tribunal proceedings.
When is a condition a disability?
This case highlights the importance of meeting the legal definition of disability under the Equality Act 2010. The claimant, a warehouse operative, alleged she was disabled due to PTSD, abdominal pain, and a necrotic hip. However, the tribunal found that the evidence did not show these conditions had a substantial and long-term adverse effect on her ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.
The claimant did not attend the hearing to give evidence, and her unsigned disability impact statement was given little weight. The tribunal noted that she had previously exaggerated symptoms in other litigation, which further undermined her case.
What could have been done differently?
The claimant's representative could have ensured she attended the hearing or provided compelling medical evidence linking her conditions to specific daily limitations. The respondent's occupational health advisors had already concluded she was not disabled, and the tribunal agreed.
Why this matters
This case serves as a reminder that simply having a medical diagnosis does not automatically make you disabled in the eyes of the law. To succeed in a disability discrimination claim, you must provide clear evidence of how your impairment substantially affects your daily life over the long term.
Similar cases
Employer's failure to comply with tribunal orders leads to strike out and £15,000 award
A local authority employee was awarded £15,483 after her employer's response was struck out for failing to comply with case management orders, leaving the tribunal unable to hold a fair hearing.
Lorry driver with 18 days' service: unfair dismissal struck out but discrimination claims survive
A lorry driver who resigned after 18 days and later worked as an agency driver was unable to claim unfair dismissal due to short service, but his disability and race discrimination claims will proceed to a final hearing.
Unfair dismissal claim struck out for lack of service and failure to pursue
A former employee who brought an unfair dismissal claim with less than two years' service had the claim struck out after failing to comply with tribunal orders or respond to warnings.
Less than two years' service: unfair dismissal claim struck out against Marks and Spencer
A former employee with under two years' service had her unfair dismissal claim struck out. All remaining discrimination and wrongful dismissal claims were dismissed after a full hearing.