Eddie Stobart Ltd

Case Summary

Claimant Julie Evans was found to be disabled due to menopause. The case revolves around the Respondent's alleged refusal to provide a working pattern that would have been a reasonable adjustment for her menopause symptoms.

The tribunal found that the claimant was disabled due to menopause and that the respondent failed to provide a reasonable adjustment in the form of a working pattern that would have accommodated her menopause symptoms.

• •provision of a working pattern for menopause symptoms as reasonable adjustment

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Julie Evans Respondent: Eddie Stobart Limited Heard at: Liverpool Employment Tribunal via CVP On: 4 September 2025 Before: Employment Judge Serr Representation Claimant: Mr K Connor, Solicitor Respondent: Ms Halsall, Counsel PRELIMINARY HEARING IN PUBLIC JUDGMENT 1. At the relevant times (May- August 2024) the claimant was a disabled person as defined by section 6 Equality Act 2010 because of the menopause. REASONS Introduction 1. The Claimant brings claims for disability discrimination. The claims are set out in a List of Issues the Tribunal has had sight of. It is unnecessary to set out those issues. Suffice to say that the Claimant was a lorry driver with the Respondent’s predecessor in title. She was transferred across to the Respondent in May 2024 (pursuant to the TUPE Regs) and dismissed from the Respondent with an appeal against dismissal being in August 2024. The material period is therefore May-August 2024. 2. The dispute revolves around an alleged refusal on the part of Respondent to provide a working pattern she had with the transferor which she says was a reasonable adjustment for her menopause symptoms. 3. The Claimant relies on menopause as the impairment. Disability is not conceded and EJ Wilkinson listed today’s hearing as a public Preliminary Hearing to determine the issue of whether the claimant was a disabled person within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010 at all or any time relevant to the claims made. Procedure 4. The Tribunal had a file of 135 pages including a disability impact statement and extensive medical records. It heard from the Claimant who was cross examined and submissions in writing from Mr Connor and orally from Ms Halsall, representatives for both parties. The Tribunal is grateful for their assistance. Th…