header-logo header-logo

Stress alert!

30 October 2009 / Heather Platt
Issue: 7391 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Heather Platt provides an update on stress related case law

Stress has been described by the Court of Appeal as “an excess of demands upon an individual in excess of their ability to cope” (see Hatton v Sutherland and other appeals [2002] EWCA Civ 76, [2002] All ER (D) 53 (Feb)).

Stress is not a psychiatric injury: however it can lead to feelings of anxiety and depression or exacerbate other conditions such as dyslexia or epilepsy. Employers should be aware that employees may become disabled for the purposes of Disability Discrimination Act 1995, s 1.

The Court of Appeal felt that there are no occupations which should be regarded as intrinsically dangerous to mental health. Further, an employer is entitled to assume that an employee is able to withstand the ordinary pressures of the job and is generally entitled to take what he is told by his employee at face value, unless there is a good reason to think to the contrary.

Case law

The starting point is LJ Hale’s now well known guidelines in

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll