Mental impairment

Case 6: The facts

Caren Burdett suffered from a chronic recurrent depression which had a long-term, substantial adverse effect on her ability to carry out day-to-day activities. She claimed that she was disabled within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.

Her employers said she could not be disabled, since the condition she claimed to be suffering from was not in the World Health Organisation classification of mental impairments so was not clinically well recognised.

The ruling

The EAT held that a condition is not automatically excluded from the definition of a disability simply because it is not classified. Burdett's medical practitioner had made a clear diagnosis identifying the nature of her impairment. Provided, as had happened in this case, the tribunal had taken account of the evidence (both medical and the individual's own evidence), it could come to a conclusion.

John Grooms Housing Association v Burdett EAT/0937/03