This guide is maintained as a current resource for September 2026 and covers only the laws of England and Wales. Information is for general guidance, not legal advice. Consult a qualified solicitor for advice specific to your situation.
Comprehensive guide to discrimination arising from disability under UK equality law. Explains how it differs from direct discrimination, the legal test under the Equality Act 2010, employer knowledge requirements, objective justification, tribunal claims, remedies and practical steps for workplace fairness.
Discrimination arising from disability is a specific type of unlawful treatment recognised under UK law. It protects disabled employees and workers from being treated unfairly not because of their impairment itself, but because of something that results from that impairment. This legal protection sits alongside other forms of disability discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 and often arises in workplace claims to an employment tribunal. This guide explains what the law says, how discrimination arising from disability works in practice, employer responsibilities, how claims are brought, and common questions with practical examples.
What Is Disability and Disability Discrimination?
A person is considered disabled under the Equality Act 2010 if they have a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long‑term adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day‑to‑day activities. This definition applies in employment and many other contexts. Disability discrimination can take several forms, including direct discrimination, indirect discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, harassment and victimisation. One specific form, discrimination arising from disability, has its own legal test.
Understanding Discrimination Arising From Disability
What the Law Says
Section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 establishes discrimination arising from disability. It occurs when an employer or other person treats a disabled individual unfavourably because of something arising in consequence of their disability, and the treatment cannot be objectively justified. In simple terms, this means the unfavourable treatment is linked to a consequence of the disability - not necessarily the disability itself - and there is no legitimate, proportionate reason for it.
A key difference between this and direct discrimination is that no comparator is required. A claimant does not need to show they were treated less favourably than someone without the disability. It is sufficient to show a connection between the unfavourable treatment and something that results from the disability.
Knowledge Requirement
For a claim to succeed, the decision‑maker (typically the employer) must know, or be reasonably expected to know, that the person has a disability or that the “something” that led to unfavourable treatment resulted from the disability. If the employer neither knew nor could reasonably be expected to know, there is no discrimination under this section.
Examples of Discrimination Arising From Disability
Examples help illustrate how this form of discrimination operates in the workplace:
- An employee is disciplined or dismissed because of repeated sickness absence that resulted from their disability. The unfavourable treatment arises because of the absence - a consequence of the disability - not because of the disability itself.
- A worker with dyslexia is denied promotion because their spelling and typing errors, which flow from the disability, are treated as a negative performance indicator without adjustments being considered.
- A disabled person is not offered flexible hours needed for medical appointments, and this is used as a reason to refuse opportunities at work.
These examples show that the “something arising in consequence” can include absence, behaviour changes, the need for specific support, or effects on work performance.
Objective Justification
Discrimination arising from disability is not automatically unlawful in every case. An employer can defend such a claim by showing that the unfavourable treatment was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. This is known as objective justification. Legitimate aims might include health and safety requirements or essential business needs, provided the measures taken are proportionate to those aims.
In practice, objective justification is a high threshold. Employers must provide evidence that the unfavourable treatment was genuinely necessary and balanced against the discriminatory impact.
Employer Responsibilities and Reasonable Adjustments
An employer's duty under the Equality Act extends beyond avoiding discriminatory conduct. Employers must take proactive steps to remove substantial disadvantages that disabled employees face by making reasonable adjustments to working practices, physical features, or provisions, criteria and practices. Failing to make reasonable adjustments is itself a separate form of disability discrimination.
Reasonable adjustments might include:
- Modifying work patterns or hours to accommodate medical appointments or fatigue.
- Providing specialist equipment or software.
- Adapting performance measures or targets.
The adjustment is only required where a disabled person would otherwise be placed at a substantial disadvantage compared with non‑disabled employees.
Bringing a Claim to an Employment Tribunal
Time Limits and Procedure
If an employee believes they have been subject to discrimination arising from disability, they must start by notifying ACAS and engaging in early conciliation before lodging a claim with an employment tribunal. Most claims must be presented within three months less one day from the date of the unfavourable act.
A tribunal will consider whether there was unfavourable treatment, whether it arose because of something connected with the disability, whether the employer knew or ought reasonably to have known, and whether the treatment can be objectively justified.
Remedies
If successful, a tribunal may award compensation for financial loss and injury to feelings. The exact remedy depends on the circumstances and severity of the discrimination. Compensation is often calculated based on loss of earnings, the impact on career progression, and the personal effect of the discrimination.
Common Questions
Is discrimination arising from disability the same as direct discrimination?
No. Direct discrimination requires less favourable treatment because of the disability itself and a comparison with a non‑disabled person. Discrimination arising from disability focuses on unfavourable treatment because of something that results from the disability and does not require a comparator.
What if the employer did not know about the disability?
If the employer had no knowledge and could not reasonably have been expected to know that the person was disabled, the claim for discrimination arising from disability usually cannot succeed.
Can an employer justify unfavourable treatment?
Yes - if they can show that the treatment was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. However, employers must provide evidence to support this and show that no less discriminatory alternatives were available.
Practical Considerations
Employees should keep detailed records of instances of unfavourable treatment and how these link to their disability or its effects. Evidence of the employer's knowledge of the disability and any reasonable adjustments requested or made can be crucial. Employers should train managers to recognise the range of issues that might arise from disabilities and ensure fair and consistent application of policies.
Summary
Discrimination arising from disability under the Equality Act 2010 protects employees from unfavourable treatment linked to consequences of their disability, even if the treatment is not directly because of the disability itself. Unlike direct discrimination, no comparator is required, but claimants must show a causal connection between the unfavourable treatment and something arising from the disability, and that the employer knew (or ought to have known) about the disability. Employers can defend such claims only by objective justification - showing the treatment was proportionate and necessary. Reasonable adjustments and proactive workplace practices help prevent such discrimination and support employees with disabilities.
