The Claimant was dismissed after an investigation concluded that she was responsible for a series of incidents which amounted to disrupting the running of of the Respondent's organisation and harassing two members of staff. At the disciplinary hearing before her dismissal, the Claimant was asked at the start of the hearing if she was fit to continue and said that she was. The Claimant had twice been advised in writing that the Respondent would consider an adjournment if she provided a letter from a medical practitioner stating that she was unfit to attend and indicating when she would be fit. The ET dismissed her claim of unfair dismissal and she appealed on two grounds.

The EAT dismissed her appeal. The ET erred in law in concluding that treatment was not because of something arising in consequence of disability. However, because the ET also found that the treatment was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, and that determination was not appealed, the rejection of the section 15 claim was upheld. There was no error of law in the rejection of the claim of unfair dismissal.