Employment Appeal Tribunal Dismisses Disability Discrimination Appeal in Badham v Jaguar Land Rover Ltd
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has dismissed an appeal by Mr Badham against Jaguar Land Rover, ruling that findings from previous litigation made the case academic.
• public
Tribunal Rules on Disability Discrimination Appeal
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has dismissed an appeal brought by Mr K Badham against Jaguar Land Rover Ltd. The case, which centred on a refusal by the respondent to fund further counselling sessions, concluded that the matter had become academic due to existing legal findings.
Background and Procedural History
The dispute originated from a 2022 decision by Jaguar Land Rover to refuse funding for additional cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for Mr Badham. The claimant alleged that this refusal constituted disability discrimination under the Equality Act 2010, citing both irritable bowel syndrome and mental health impairments, specifically anxiety and depression.
In a preliminary hearing held in July 2024, Employment Judge Hena ruled that the claimant had not established a disability related to mental health at the material time of March 2022. Mr Badham subsequently appealed this decision.
The Issue of Estoppel
During the appeal proceedings, the EAT considered evidence from a separate tribunal, known as the Platt Tribunal, which had previously dismissed the claimant's discrimination claims related to his IBS. The EAT judge, Sarah Crowther KC, noted that the Platt Tribunal had made clear findings regarding the respondent's reasons for refusing to fund the CBT sessions.
The EAT found that the Platt Tribunal had concluded that the respondent's decision was motivated by factors entirely unrelated to the claimant's health, such as the efficacy of the treatment in facilitating a return to work and the existence of an ongoing employment dispute. Consequently, the EAT determined that an issue estoppel had arisen. This meant it was not open to the claimant to re-litigate the reasons behind the funding refusal under a different disability claim, rendering the current appeal academic.
Merits of the Decision
Although the appeal was dismissed on the basis of issue estoppel, the EAT also addressed the merits of the original decision. The judge acknowledged that while the written reasons provided by the employment tribunal were brief, they were sufficient to show that the correct legal test under section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 had been applied. The tribunal was entitled to conclude that the claimant did not suffer from a disability by reason of mental impairment as of 7 March 2022.
Read the entire judgment here: Badham v Jaguar Land Rover Ltd [2026] EAT 94
