The Claimant was disabled within the meaning of the EA 2010 because of problems with his back and he had a year off sick as a result. When he returned to work, he was asked to undertake work he would not have normally done and he refused to do the work. He was dismissed. At the ET, he won a claim for disability discrimination but it was found that his dismissal was fair. His appeal to the EAT failed and he appealed to the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, rejecting the argument that the Tribunal was wrong in law to find that it was reasonable for the Respondent to dismiss the Claimant for his refusal to work when that refusal was itself a reasonable response to its own refusal to allow him to return to his full previous role which the Tribunal had found to constitute unlawful discrimination. It was clear that the Tribunal did not believe that the fact that the Claimant should have been allowed to return to his old role in full was a sufficient reason for him refusing to perform any part of that role.

Read the full text of the judgment on Bailii