Employment Law Case Study: Discrimination Against a Special Needs Assistant Due to Disability

EMPLOYMENT LAW -
CASENOTE NANO NAGLE

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
MAIN BODY...................................................................................................................................3
Question 1....................................................................................................................................3
Question 2....................................................................................................................................5
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................7
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................1

INTRODUCTION
The case study is related to the Employment Law and Equality Law at workplace. The
case is between Marie Daly, the plaintiff and Nano Nagle School, the defendant. This case study
is about the discrimination against the plaintiff due to the disability suffered by Marie Daly. It
also states That the plaintiff is not capable of handling the job due to the disability.
MAIN BODY
Question 1
Marie Daly, the plaintiff was working as a Special need assistant for the nano nagle
school, a school for children with special disabilities. The teachers are assigned to guide the
children, supervising the children and assisting children in eating and dressing.
In July 2010, Marie Daly met with the car accident which left the plaintiff paralysed and
confined to wheelchair. The school as an employer stated that the plaintiff is unfit for the job
and refused her to return to work(Nolan, and Barrett, 2019). The plaintiff performed an
assessment where she found out that Marie Daly could only perform nine out of sixteen duties
requires for the job of SNA.
As assisted and advised by the Trade Union, the plaintiff filed an application and the claim under
the Employment Equality Act was first heard by the Equality Officer. She claimed that the
school decisions constitutes unlawful discrimination with the Plaintiff. The officer determined
that the appellant is not capable to perform the duties of SNA.
The appeal was sent to the where the labour court which reversed the decision of the equality
court and stated that the school has failed to provide necessary accommodation to the appellant
and awarded compensation. The decision of high court was reversed by the court of appeal and
Marie Daly finally appealed to the High court.
The claim raised by the plaintiff under the Employment Act claiming the unlawful
discrimination by the school and the employer(defendant) did not comply with the provisions of
the act to provide reasonable accommodation and appropriate measures to accommodate the
disability which can allow her to return to job(Sinden, 2017). One of the important issue raised
by the court pf appeal that focused on the core tasks and duties at workplace. The court pointed
out that a person has been provided with the reasonable measures to disable person, the employer
has no obligation to remove the employee from its position.