Definition of disability

Case 8: The facts

Ms McDougall brought a claim of disability discrimination after an offer of employment was withdrawn because she failed to get medical clearance. McDougall had a persistent delusional disorder and had been compulsorily admitted under the Mental Health Act in 2001; she was admitted again when she had a relapse in 2005.

A tribunal found that, although McDougall had a mental impairment, she was not disabled under the Disability Disrimination Act (DDA) because her condition – which had lasted for eight months at the most – did not have a substantial and long-term adverse effect on her ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.

The ruling

The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that McDougall was disabled under the DDA. Although it accepted that compulsory admission of a patient under the Mental Health Act does not automatically mean that s/he is disabled under the DDA, the tribunal had received evidence that she had relapsed and had been admitted to hospital again. This, and the nature of her diagnosis as a “persistent” condition, should have led the tribunal to find that the condition was likely to recur.

A condition that has not lasted for a year but is likely to recur is defined as a disability under the DDA, and consequently McDougall could pursue her claim.

McDougall v Richmond Adult Community College EAT/0589/06