Follow us

An EAT has ruled that, as the duty to make a reasonable adjustment for a disabled employee is a continuing duty, a failure to comply with that duty was a continuing act, at least where the employer committed to a review. As such, the time limit for bringing a claim did not run from the employer's decision not to make the adjustment.

This conflicts with an earlier Court of Appeal ruling (Matuszowicz) that the time limit starts to run on the expiry of the period within which the employer might reasonably have been expected to make the relevant adjustment. However, the EAT's decision was also based on the fact that the employer had expressly stated that it was constantly monitoring the situation and that the decision might be reviewed, which made clear that there was no "once and for all" refusal. Employers may wish to bear the effect of making such a commitment in mind, at least while Matuszowicz remains good law. (Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Jobcentre Plus) v Jamil, EAT)

Key contacts

Samantha Brown photo

Samantha Brown

Managing Partner of EPI (West), London

Samantha Brown
Steve Bell photo

Steve Bell

Managing Partner - Employment, Industrial Relations and Safety (Australia, Asia), Melbourne

Steve Bell
Emma Rohsler photo

Emma Rohsler

Regional Head of Practice (EMEA) - Employment Pensions and Incentives, Paris

Emma Rohsler
Andrew Taggart photo

Andrew Taggart

Partner, London

Andrew Taggart
Fatim Jumabhoy photo

Fatim Jumabhoy

Managing Partner, Singapore, Singapore

Fatim Jumabhoy
Barbara Roth photo

Barbara Roth

Partner, New York

Barbara Roth