header-logo header-logo

18 July 2014 / Spencer Keen
Issue: 7615 / Categories: Features , Public
printer mail-detail

Firm answer

specialist_public_keen

Employers do not owe a duty to make reasonable adjustments for persons who are not disabled, says Spencer Keen

The Court of Appeal has recently confirmed in Hainsworth v MOD [2014] EWCA Civ 763 that the duty to make reasonable adjustments is only owed to disabled employees and that adjustments are not required to be made for employees who are associated in some way with a disabled person.

Hainsworth

The appellant in this case was employed by the British armed forces in a civilian capacity since 30 April 1998. She was an inclusion support development teacher at the relevant time and was required to work from a British Garrison in Germany. Her daughter had Down’s Syndrome and was disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010. Although the respondent provided educational facilities for the children of its employees it did not provide special educational needs facilities. The claimant’s daughter could not therefore receive her schooling from the respondent in Germany.

After a number of informal enquiries the claimant submitted a formal request

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

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll