The Claimant, who has worked for the Respondent for over 30 years, was on sick leave for more than a year for stress caused by bullying and harassment at work, which amounted to a disability. On her return to work, she requested an undertaking that she would not be required to work with specific colleagues, but the Respondent refused to give such an undertaking. On the Claimant's claim of disability discrimination, the ET found generally in her favour, concluding that such refusal constituted a failure to make reasonable adjustments; and it made a recommendation for an undertaking by the Respondent in similar but different terms, although this recommendation was set aside on reconsideration. The Respondent appealed on a number of grounds against liability; also, the Claimant contested that the recommendation should not have been set aside on reconsideration, while the Respondent asserted that the proposed recommendation could not be upheld in principle; and, finally, the Claimant complained that the ET had anonymised the names of the colleagues involved.

The EAT held that the ET was entitled to reach the view that it did on liability, but that there was no reason why the ET should not have made a recommendation along the lines proposed; further, the EAT considered that the ET should have invited submissions before anonymising the names and it should have given reasons. Accordingly, the matters concerning both the recommendation and anonymity would be remitted to the same ET.