The Claimant, who was a train cleaner, brought a complaint that the Respondent had failed to make reasonable adjustments. He had been signed off work for a very long period of time by his GP because of dizziness symptoms. He requested that he be considered for a role as security guard which would not involve bending or lifting but this was rejected. Following various OH appointments and after raising a grievance, the Claimant resigned. His claim that the Respondent had not made reasonable adjustments was rejected, the ET concluding that the Claimant had failed to prove that his underlying condition which caused dizziness and headaches had a substantial and long-term adverse effect on his ability to stand on his feet for long periods or move around. The Claimant appealed.

The EAT dismissed the appeal. The ET had to weigh up evidence that pointed in different directions. There was evidence that supported the existence of a disability and there was evidence that suggested otherwise. Weighing up competing evidence was fundamentally a matter for the ET. That assessment could only be interfered with if the ET had reached a perverse decision. The EAT did not consider that could be said to be the case.