Substantial and adverse effect

Case 2: The facts

Mrs Swift took sick leave with a psychiatric illness after two colleagues bullied and harassed her. She asked her employer to arrange for her not to work with them again, but was still rostered to be on duty with them.

Swift claimed disability discrimination, arguing that her employer had not made reasonable adjustments. The issue on appeal was whether Swift was disabled under the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA).

The ruling

To meet the definition in the DDA, a person must show that their medical condition has a "substantial adverse effect on their day-to-day activities" for one year or more. If the adverse effects last for less time than that, their condition can still amount to a disability if it is likely to recur.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that the tribunal had been entitled to find that Swift was not disabled, as she had failed to establish that the effects of her condition were likely to recur. It pointed out that the question was whether the "substantial adverse effect" was likely to recur, not whether the illness was likely to recur.

Swift v Chief Constable of Wiltshire Constabulary[2004] IRLR 540