header-logo header-logo

12 June 2008 / Neil Allen
Issue: 7325 / Categories: Features , Public , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-detail

All in the mind?

Are employers discriminating against disabled working minds? Neil Allen reports

The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA 1995) protects job applicants and employees whose physical or mental impairment has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. Prior to December 2005, any mental impairment must also have resulted from or consisted of a “clinically well-recognised” mental illness. This diagnostic threshold was intended only to exclude moody or mildly eccentric claimants from statutory protection. However, “psychiatry is not an exact science. Diagnosis is not easy or clear cut” (R (on the application of B) v Ashworth [2005] 2 All ER 289 per Baroness Hale). As a result, DDA 1995 did nothing to prevent employers from treating less favourably those whose psychiatric symptoms were not clinically well-recognised.

Despite having little more than “a layman's rudimentary familiarity with psychiatric classification” (Morgan v Staffordshire University [2001] All ER (D) 119), employment tribunals have been expected to assess often complex expert evidence. The Employment

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
back-to-top-scroll