UK Barrister ordered to pay over £155,000 after discriminatory treatment worsened assistant’s mental health
An employment court said the claimant, referred to as C, had a reoccurrence of symptoms as a result of the impact of the discriminatory treatment she received from the barrister, named as D.
A British barrister must pay her legal assistant more than £155,000 after an employment judge found her discriminatory treatment and the resulting litigation had ‘exacerbated’ the employee’s poor mental health and post-traumatic stress disorder.
An employment court said the claimant, referred to as C, had a reoccurrence of symptoms as a result of the impact of the discriminatory treatment she received from the barrister, named as D.
According to the judgment, the barrister operated a legal practice together with a solicitor but employed C personally. C had a pre-existing disability, fibromyalgia and chronic pain as well as a prior history of PTSD. Her new symptoms included difficulty with concentration, seizures, and an inability to go out alone. These ‘proved catastrophic to her life and her career plans have been put on hold’.
The judge added: ‘I am satisfied that as a result of the impact of the discriminatory treatment the claimant received from D these coping strategies [for her health] broke down, her mental health also broke down and she suffered the reoccurrence of the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder such that the impact on the claimant goes beyond normal injury to feelings and has resulted in a personal injury.’
The judgment highlighted that since C’s ‘health collapsed’ she had been ‘completely unable to work’, her speech had been affected, she is unable to walk unaided, and has ‘regular seizures triggered by stress’.
Finding the barrister liable, the judge said: ‘I am satisfied that [D] caused or significantly contributed to the development of the recent symptoms and the development of the functional neurological disorder, such that it is not possible to separate out the discriminatory treatment from any other cause or contribution.’
In an earlier judgment, the judge found that the assistant 'was told by D that if she was not able to work seven days a week then D would find someone to replace her as her personal assistant’. She said the ‘remark amounts to unfavourable treatment’.
While C succeeded in her claims of disability discrimination and unlawful deduction of £497.71 from wages, her claim for unfair dismissal was dismissed due to lack of two years’ service.
At a remedy hearing, the judge found the total D must pay C was £155,413.46 which included loss of earnings totalling £60,415.56, injury to feelings including personal injury in the sum of £90,000, plus £4,996.90 interest.
