Disability discrimination: risk to health
Risk to health
Case Judd v Cabinet Office EA-2020-000468-AT
Facts J, a disabled person employed by CO, successfully applied for secondment in Montenegro. This was withdrawn after CO was advised that J would be at high risk to her health if she was seconded. It was accepted that the withdrawal was unfavourable treatment arising from her disability. It was also agreed that the withdrawal had the legitimate aim of protecting the health, safety and wellbeing of secondees when working abroad. The issue was whether this was a proportionate step. The ET found that the withdrawal was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. J appealed to the EAT.
Decision 1. The appeal was dismissed.
2. The grounds of appeal included arguments that the ET had misdirected itself, had failed to consider reasonable adjustments, raised unfounded criticisms which did not undermine the ET’s reasoning.