The Claimant, who is a disabled person for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010 in respect of three medical conditions, worked for the Respondent for more than 10 years. She brought various claims in the ET of disability discrimination, harassment and victimisation, all of which were dismissed. The Claimant appealed in relation to the disability discrimination claim on the grounds that the ET had erred in finding that (1) the provision, criteria or practice relating to the use of conventional computer software applied only to her and not to all employees and/or that she suffered no substantial disadvantage, (2) in respect of specialist software upgrades, not being more efficient was not a substantial disadvantage and/or was not something in respect of which a reasonable adjustment was required, and (3) efficiency issues in relation to her laptop access to the Respondent's guest Wi-Fi were not capable of giving rise to a substantial disadvantage.

The EAT held that the ET should have asked itself whether the Claimant's disabilities placed her at a substantial disadvantage; where she was seeking adjustments to improve her efficiency, the question was whether she suffered a substantial disadvantage; in ruling out a possible correlation between these matters, the ET failed to identify the nature and extent of any disadvantage claimed by the Claimant. Accordingly, the appeal succeeded on all grounds and the matter would be remitted for hearing by an ET whose composition would be determined by the Regional Employment Judge.