A newly qualified solicitor who was rejected from a job after disclosing her disability, has been awarded £23,000 from an employment tribunal.

Kandice Farrow had worked as a legal secretary for some years before completing the legal practice course. She worked at the Yorkshire firm Pinkney Grunwells as a conveyancing assistant and then as a trainee solicitor, before leaving in 2019 after raising a grievance against the partners and her manager over their treatment of her due to her condition. She transferred her training contract to another firm but four months later was furloughed due to Covid.

In July 2020 Ms Farrow qualified as a solicitor but with the new firm unable to offer her a job, she altered her LinkedIn profile to read ‘Newly qualified solicitor seeking employment’.

This led to an approach from Natalie Foster - owner of Foster Clay Law - a virtual firm that had been newly established, about joining them.

According to Ms. Farrow, she and Ms. Foster discussed her illness in detail, with the tribunal finding that Ms. Farrow had been “careful to be forthright with Ms. Foster about her condition” to avoid what had happened at Pinkney Grunwells.

Ms. Farrow maintained she was offered a job - subject to references - although Foster Clay Law denied that the situation had got to that stage.

Ms. Foster then contacted Pinkney Grunwell for a reference - with her notes stating she was told Ms. Farrow may have a bad attitude and could be a risk to the business. Additionally, a reference from Pinkney Grunwell training partner Hayley Garnett stated that Ms. Farrow left over a grievance and had lots of absences from work due to illness amongst other things.

Ms. Foster subsequently contacted Ms. Farrow to inform her that she had been rejected, to which she asked if there was anything she could do to provide Ms. Foster with “more clarity regarding my medical condition”.

Ms. Foster replied:

“No medical condition has any bearing on the firm’s decision to recruit.”

Despite knowing this, the employment tribunal sitting in Leeds found that Foster Clay Law treated Ms. Farrow unfavourably as they knew that she previously had significant absences from work due to her illness and would need flexibility and to make adjustments.

The tribunal ruled:

“The discriminatory effect of the unfavourable treatment on the claimant was significant. Farrow was a newly qualified solicitor with a disability, who needed significant flexibility, meaning her job search was unlikely to be straightforward. She had been approached by the respondents and offered what appeared to be an attractive position and the flexibility she needed.”

It continued:

“She had been open and honest with them about her needs and her condition and had hopes that they would make the adjustments she needed. Instead the recruitment process was terminated abruptly precisely because of her disability-related requirements and history, jeopardising her job-search and damaging her self-confidence.”

The tribunal ordered Foster Clay Law to pay Ms. Farrow £16,632 for injury to feelings and £6,442 in pecuniary loss. The firm must also pay Ms. Farrow’s costs of £4,867.

Following the ruling, the firm issued a statement saying:

“This case highlights the challenges faced for businesses, especially start-ups, recruiting remotely during the pandemic, along with the importance of having watertight processes in place for recruitment given that obligations on employers and individuals begin prior to employment starting.”

It continued:

“Reassuringly the tribunal made “no finding of malice or deliberate falsehood on the part of the Respondents and Natalie Foster was not found to have had actual knowledge of disability”.