We Buy Any Car Ltd

Case Summary

The claimant, Ms G Daly, sought reconsideration of the judge’s decision that she was not disabled for the purposes of s6 Equality Act 2010. The judge allowed the application, revoked paragraph 45 of the original judgment, and confirmed that at the relevant time, the claimant was not considered disabled.

• •reconsideration of disability determination
• •medical evidence and claimant's behavior during pandemic

Case No. 2408989/2021 1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Ms G Daly Respondent: We Buy Any Car Limited Employment Judge Sharkett (on the papers) JUDGMENT ON RECONSIDERATION The Claimant’s application for reconsideration of 25 th October 2022 is allowed and the Judgment is remade. At the relevant time the claimant was not disabled for the purposes of s6 Equality Act 2010. Reasons 1. The claimant seeks a reconsideration of my decision that at the relevant time she was not a disabled person for the purposes of s6 Equality Act 2010 (“the Act”). There was some delay in this request being brought to my attention which is the reason why it is only now considered. 2. The application is made under Rule 70 of the Employment Rules of Procedure and was submitted within the relevant time period. It is requested in the interests of justice and to avoid the parties having to undergo a full appeal to the EAT. 3. The basis of the application is that on the claimant’s understanding of the Judgment, there has been an error of law in my approach because I have applied the wrong test and failed to consider whether the claimant has a recurring condition that would satisfy the test. 4. It was agreed between the parties that the relevant time for determination of whether or not the claimant was disabled for the purposes of s6 of the Act was 2 nd to 19 th March 2021. 5. In reaching my decision to allow the claimant’s application for a reconsideration I have carefully considered my findings and the evidence that Case No. 2408989/2021 2 was presented at the hearing. I find that paragraph 45 of the Judgment of 10 th October 2022 is inconsistent with my overall reasoning in the Judgment and does not address all aspects of the test for disability. For this reason I have considered the matter again. I cons…