On 29 January 2021, the Kemp Little team joined Deloitte Legal. Click here to view the press release.

As of 30 January 2021, Kemp Little LLP ceased to operate as a firm of solicitors and practice law and ceased to be regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

Kemp Little LLP has been re-named KL Heritage LLP.

If you are looking to contact a specific individual to seek legal advice or in respect of any other business relationship, please contact Deloitte Legal.

If you are seeking to contact the old Kemp Little LLP in relation to a previous business relationship or matter, please get in touch with KL Heritage LLP.

For enquiries relating to Kemp Little technology products and training portal, please email deloittelegal@deloitte.co.uk

 


 

Kemp Little is a trade name used under licence by KL Heritage LLP (formerly Kemp Little LLP, registered number OC300242 and VAT number 182 8854 65).

On 29 January 2021, the Kemp Little team joined Deloitte Legal.  As of 30 January 2021, Kemp Little ceased to operate as a firm of solicitors and practice law. From this date Kemp Little ceased to be authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and is being re-named KL Heritage LLP.

All references to Kemp Little herein are references to KL Heritage LLP, which used to carry on business in that name.

KL Heritage LLP is not connected to or associated with Deloitte Legal or Deloitte LLP in any capacity.

 

Kemp Little
  • Looking for someone?
  • Email us
  • Search
MENU MENU
Insights overview

Employment · 3 April 2018 · Lucy Sorell

Court of Appeal: employer did not have constructive knowledge of employee’s disablity – no duty to make reasonable adjustments

The Court of Appeal has upheld a tribunal’s decision that Liberata UK Limited (“LUK”) did not have constructive knowledge of an employee’s disability and, therefore,… Read more

more content below

The Court of Appeal has upheld a tribunal’s decision that Liberata UK Limited (“LUK”) did not have constructive knowledge of an employee’s disability and, therefore, had no duty to make reasonable adjustments.

The employee, Ms Donelien, worked for LUK as a court officer, before being dismissed in October 2009 for persistent short-term absences and failure to comply with LUK’s absence reporting procedures.  In the last year of her employment, Ms Donelien was absent for 128 days, giving LUK numerous explanations for these absences, including work-related stress, high blood pressure, dizzy spells, stomach upset, wrist pain and breathing difficulties.

In January 2009, following a period of absence and a letter from Ms Donelien’s GP, it was agreed that Ms Donelien would have a phased return to work, however, her health problems continued.  LUK sought to refer Ms Donelien to an Occupational Health specialist (“OH”) but Ms Donelien was uncooperative and refused.

Ms Donelien’s absences continued and in April 2009, LUK received a second letter from Ms Donelien’s GP which confirmed that she was fit to return to work.  Some weeks later, following a further letter from the GP, LUK again referred Ms Donelien to OH. As part of the referral, LUK posed several questions to OH which included whether there was any medical condition which could explain Ms Donelien’s repeated absences, how long such a condition was likely to last and whether there were any recommended adjustments.

The OH report stated that Ms Donelien was not disabled, but it did not respond to all of LUK’s questions.  LUK sought further clarification and received a more detailed report from OH, from a different doctor who had only spoken to Ms Donelien by phone, but some of the questions remained unanswered.  Although LUK did not again revert to OH, further attempts were made by LUK to understand Ms Donelien’s condition during the return to work meetings but proved to be unproductive.  Ms Donelien was uncooperative and, at times, confrontational during such meetings.

LUK initiated disciplinary proceedings and Ms Donelien was ultimately dismissed.  Ms Donelien brought claims in the employment tribunal claiming, amongst other things, that she was disabled and that LUK had failed to make reasonable adjustments.

The tribunal dismissed all of Ms Donelien’s claims, finding that in respect of her reasonable adjustments claim, LUK had no constructive knowledge of Ms Donelien’s disability during her employment.  It was reasonable of LUK to determine that Ms Donelien was not disabled.  LUK had sought advice from OH which was consistent with their own knowledge at that time, and had done all that they could be expected to do.

The EAT upheld the Tribunal’s decision and Ms Donelien appealed to the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that is was reasonable for the Tribunal to conclude LUK did not have constructive knowledge of Ms Donelien’s disability.  The Court of Appeal noted that the correspondence from Ms Donelien’s GP did not present a consistent picture, citing numerous conditions and symptoms suffered by Ms Donelien.  LUK had sought advice from OH and asked appropriate questions as part of their referral.  The OH report had advised that Ms Donelien was not disabled within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act (“DDA”).  However, LUK did not deem the report to be conclusive, and they sought to obtain further advice following receipt of the initial OH report.  LUK had considered its own impressions from the meetings held with Ms Donelien and also the correspondence from her GP.

Comment

This decision offers reassurance to employers that provided they ask OH relevant and appropriate questions, and the answers they receive are properly considered and, where necessary, probed, they can rely on OH’s advice when determining whether their employees are disabled.  The message being that scrutiny is key – OH reports should not be taken at face value and if a report does not adequately deal with the issues raised, further questions should be asked.

This decision confirms that the test for constructive knowledge is what an employer could reasonably be expected to know; it is not necessary for an employer to take every step possible to establish disability.

  • Share this blog

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Linkedin

Lucy SorellLucy Sorell is an employment senior associate

Get in touch

View the team

Sign up for our newsletters

  • Share this Blog

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Linkedin

Other stuff you might like

  1. Webinar | Engaging contractors: your new obligations under the Off Payroll Working Rules
  2. Webinar | People and Pandemic: A U-turn on returning to work and the new Job Support Scheme
  3. UK Government publish further details on the points-based immigration system
The hottest topics in technology
  • Adtech & martech
  • Agile
  • Artificial intelligence
  • EBA outsourcing
  • Brexit
  • Cloud computing
  • Complex & sensitive investigations
  • Connectivity
  • Cryptocurrencies & blockchain
  • Cybersecurity
  • Data analytics & big data
  • Data breaches
  • Data rights
  • Digital commerce
  • Digital content risk
  • Digital health
  • Digital media
  • Digital infrastructure & telecoms
  • Emerging businesses
  • Financial services
  • Fintech
  • Gambling
  • GDPR
  • KLick DPO
  • KLick Trade Mark
  • Open banking
  • Retail
  • SMCR
  • Software & services
  • Sourcing
  • Travel
close
The hottest topics in technology
  • Adtech & martech
  • Agile
  • Artificial intelligence
  • EBA outsourcing
  • Brexit
  • Cloud computing
  • Complex & sensitive investigations
  • Connectivity
  • Cryptocurrencies & blockchain
  • Cybersecurity
  • Data analytics & big data
  • Data breaches
  • Data rights
  • Digital commerce
  • Digital content risk
  • Digital health
  • Digital media
  • Digital infrastructure & telecoms
  • Emerging businesses
  • Financial services
  • Fintech
  • Gambling
  • GDPR
  • KLick DPO
  • KLick Trade Mark
  • Open banking
  • Retail
  • SMCR
  • Software & services
  • Sourcing
  • Travel
Kemp Little

Lawyers
and thought leaders who are passionate about technology

Expand footer

Kemp Little

138 Cheapside
City of London
EC2V 6BJ

020 7600 8080

hello@kemplittle.com

Services

  • Commercial technology
  • Consulting
  • Disputes
  • Intellectual property
  • Employment
  • Immigration

 

  • Sourcing
  • Corporate
  • Data protection & privacy
  • Financial regulation
  • Private equity & venture capital
  • Tax

Sitemap

  • Our people
  • Insights
  • Events
  • About us
  • Contact us
  • Cookies
  • Privacy
  • Terms of use
  • Complaints
  • Debt recovery charges

Follow us

  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • FlightDeck
  • Sign up for our newsletters

Kemp Little LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales (registered number OC300242) and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Its registered office is 138 Cheapside, London EC2V 6BJ. The SRA Standards and Regulations can be accessed by clicking here.

  • Cyber Essentials logo
  • LORCA logo
  • ABTA Partner+ logo
  • Make Your Ask logo
  • FT Innovative Lawyers 2019 winners logo
  • Law Society Excellence Awards shortlisted
  • Legal Business Awards = highly commended
  • Home
  • Our people
  • Services
    • Business restructuring and reorganisation
    • Commercial technology
    • Consulting
    • Corporate
    • Data protection & privacy
    • Digital content & reputation risk
    • Disputes
    • Employment
    • Financial regulation
    • Immigration
    • Innovation
    • Intellectual property
    • Private equity & venture capital
    • Sourcing
    • Tax
    • Travel
  • Resources
  • Insights
  • Covid 19: Your Business Continuity
  • Events
  • About us
    • Who we are
    • Our social responsibilities
    • Our partnerships
    • Join us
  • Contact us
  • FlightDeck
  • Sign up for our newsletters
  • Follow us
    • Twitter
    • LinkedIn
close
close
close

Send us a message

Fill in your details and we'll be in touch soon

[contact-form-7 id="4941" title="General contact form"]
close

Sign up for our newsletter

I would like to receive updates and related news from Kemp Little *

Please select below any publications that you would like to receive:

Newsletters

close

Register for future event information

[contact-form-7 id="4943" title="Subscribe to future events"]
close
close
Generic filters
Exact matches only

Can't remember their name? View everyone

  • Home
  • Our people
  • Services
    • Business restructuring and reorganisation
    • Commercial technology
    • Consulting
    • Corporate
    • Data protection & privacy
    • Digital content & reputation risk
    • Disputes
    • Employment
    • Financial regulation
    • Immigration
    • Innovation
    • Intellectual property
    • Private equity & venture capital
    • Sourcing
    • Tax
    • Travel
  • Resources
  • Insights
  • Covid 19: Your Business Continuity
  • Events
  • About us
    • Who we are
    • Our social responsibilities
    • Our partnerships
    • Join us
  • Contact us
  • FlightDeck
  • Sign up for our newsletters
  • Follow us
    • Twitter
    • LinkedIn