In Knightley v Chelsea & Westminster Hospital NHS Trust the EAT considered whether a finding that an employer had failed to make reasonable adjustments in its dismissal process, rendered that dismissal unfair and discriminatory.
Ms Knightley worked for Chelsea & Westminster Hospital NHS Trust (“the Trust”) from 2009 as Lead Midwife for Mental Health. Ms Knightley was disabled, and suffered from stress, anxiety and reactive depression, for which she was prescribed antidepressant medication.
From late 2012, there were issues with Ms Knightley’s attendance at work. She was granted “a great deal of latitude and support” and adjustments were made, but she nonetheless had 67 days of sickness absence in 2013. A flexible working arrangement appeared to improve Ms Knightley’s attendance from 2014 but, in reality, her purported homeworking masked intermittent absences.
Ms Knightley was absent due to ill health from August 2015 to September 2016. Ms Knightley made a phased return, before further sickness absence in March 2017. The Trust followed its sickness absence procedures and obtained Occupational Health assessments during both periods. Ms Knightley’s employment was ended on capability grounds in April 2018.
Ms Knightley brought a number of Employment Tribunal claims against the Trust, including a failure to make reasonable adjustments to its procedure when dismissing her and by not allowing her an extension of time to lodge an appeal against her dismissal. This claim was upheld by the Employment Tribunal. Notwithstanding this, the Tribunal found the dismissal to be fair and proportionate, so dismissed Ms Knightley’s claims for unfair dismissal and disability discrimination.
Ms Knightley appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”). Her arguments included that, given that the Tribunal had found that she had been unreasonably denied an opportunity to appeal against her dismissal, she should have succeeded in her other claims.
The EAT found that whilst the Employment Tribunal’s “findings of fact may be relevant to three claims, and whilst it may well turn out that the same factual findings and criticisms which the [Employment Tribunal] made … in relation to one claim support a particular legal conclusion in relation to another claim, the legal principles applicable to each claim should be separately applied to those facts” because they are different.
This meant that the finding that the Trust had failed to make reasonable adjustments in the process of dismissing Ms Knightley did not automatically mean that Ms Knightley should succeed in her other claims, because the legal tests for each claim were different. While the “factual finding that [a] step could or should reasonably have been taken may also be relevant to the question whether a subsequent dismissal was fair … the legal conclusion that there was a breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments … of itself, is not”. Ms Knightley’s appeal was dismissed.
So, a finding that an employer has failed to make reasonable adjustments does not automatically mean that an employee will succeed in other claims arising from the same facts. The case also serves as a reminder for HR professionals to ensure that reasonable adjustments are considered when applying a company’s disciplinary procedure.
