The Claimant worked for the Respondent during a probationary period, but his employment was terminated for mixed reasons relating to attendance and performance. The Claimant asserted that, by reason of suffering depression and anxiety, he was a disabled person throughout the relevant period, and he lodged disability discrimination and harassment claims with the ET. At a Preliminary Hearing, where the Claimant appeared in person, the ET concluded that the impairment suffered by the Claimant was not long term, and so he had failed to establish he was a disabled person; accordingly, it struck out the Claimant's claims, on the basis that all of the causes of action were premised on the Claimant being a disabled person. The Claimant appealed on the basis that the ET erred (1) in failing to make findings on perceived disability discrimination harassment in this case, and (2) in striking out claims of direct disability discrimination and harassment related to disability, purely on the basis that it had found that the Claimant was not disabled.

The EAT held that, taking the broadest view of the definition of direct discrimination and harassment, the ET did not err in determining the case before it.