In Birtenshaw v Oldfield, O is disabled because of a mental health condition. She was employed by B, a provider of services for adults and children with special needs, as a care worker on a temporary basis. O applied for and was offered a permanent position, but subject to medical clearance. The medical report highlighted psychological health difficulties but held O to be medically fit for the job.  B, however, withdrew the offer because of the report. An ET upheld O’s claim that the withdrawal of the job offer was unfavourable discriminatory treatment arising in consequence of her disability which could not be justified. There was a legitimate aim that employees were mentally and physically fit, but the ET found the withdrawal of the job offer was not proportionate and the EAT agreed. The medical report judged O fit for the position, no other enquiries were made either medically or of line managers supervising O during her temporary work and a further trial period could have been considered. 

The updates are kindly provided by Simons Muirhead & Burton Law firm

This update provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and help judgments made in every aspect of the case. Click on the links to access full details. If no link is provided, contact us for more information.  Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, SM&B cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.