The Claimant was disabled by reason of depression. He applied for a post under the ‘Guaranteed Interview Scheme’ (GIS) which entitled him to a guaranteed interview if he met the minimum criteria for the post. The Respondent believed that he had dishonestly claimed that he was disabled to gain a guaranteed interview under the GIS and instigated disciplinary proceedings against him. The ET dismissed the s15 claim (discrimination arising from disability) and the s27 victimisation claim. The Claimant appealed.

The EAT allowed the appeal. The ET had erred in (i) finding that the disciplinary investigation was not something arising from the Claimant’s disability and (ii) in finding that the Claimant had not done a protected act for the purposes of the victimisation claim. The appeal was allowed and the EAT substituted a finding that the disciplinary investigation was something arising from the Claimant’s disability and remitted back to the same ET to consider the justification defence under s15(2). The EAT also remitted back to the same ET whether the Claimant had done a protected act and causation.