Fujitsu Services Ltd

Case Summary

The Claimant, who had ADHD and Autism, was dismissed for using inappropriate and offensive language in the Respondent's internal messaging system. The Claimant claimed this was due to his disability, but the Employment Tribunal found the dismissal was a proportionate means of achieving the Respondent's legitimate aims.

The ET found that while some of the Claimant's offensive comments were connected to his disability, the decision to dismiss him was a proportionate response by the Respondent to address its legitimate aims of preventing the use of threatening language and creating a hostile work environment.

• •Whether the use of inappropriate and offensive language by the Claimant in the Slack communications was directly arising from his disability
• •Whether the Respondent's decision to dismiss the Claimant was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim

Judgment approved by the court for handing down Mr T Duncan v Fujitsu Services Ltd © EAT 2025 Page 1 [2025] EAT 44 Neutral Citation Number: [2025] EAT 44 Case No: EA-2023-000945-LA EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL Rolls Building Fetter Lane, London, EC4A 1NL Date: 8 April 2025 Before: HIS HONOUR JUDGE TARIQ SADIQ MRS RACHAEL WHEELDON DR GILLIAN SMITH MBE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between: Mr T Duncan Appellant - and - Fujitsu Services Ltd Respondent - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr T Duncan the Appellant appeared In Person Mr P Michell (instructed by Pinsent Masons LLP) for the Respondent Hearing date: 18 March 2025 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT Judgment approved by the court for handing down Mr T Duncan v Fujitsu Services Ltd © EAT 2025 Page 2 [2025] EAT 44 SUMMARY DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION The Claimant was dismissed for inappropriate and offensive messages on the employer’s method of communicating with employees (“Slack communications”). The Employment Tribunal (“ET”) found applying Risby v London Borough of Waltham Forest UKEAT/0318/15/DM that although some of the comments were something arising from the Claimant’s disability, the dismissal was a proportionate response to certain of the Respondent’s legitimate aims under section 15(1)(b) of the Equality Act 2010. The Claimant appealed on the basis that the ET had (1) not considered whether the use of the language itself arose directly from his disability and (2) insufficiently analysed whether the dismissal was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. Held: dismissing the appeal (1) The ET had properly considered the case advanced by the Claimant that his comments were an indirect consequence of his disability, applying Risby; (2) the ET went onto to consider the section 15(1)(b) defence p…