Buddy says:

The EAT in the case of Project Management Institute v Latif, UKEAT 0028/07/CEA, held that in a claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments, the burden will only pass to the Respondent once the claimant has shown that they have been disadvantaged by a provision, criterion, or practice, and a suggested adjustment has been put forward (either by the claimant or the tribunal itself), as potentially reasonable.

Additional Information:

Under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA), reasonable adjustments should be made where a disabled person is at a substantial disadvantage in comparison with a person who is not disabled. The DDA also provides a non-exhaustive list of steps that should be taken in cases where reasonable adjustments should be made.

In light of the above case together with the Court of Appeal’s earlier decision in EB v BA [2006] EWCA Civ 132, the burden of proof will not pass to a Respondent until:

• The claimant has established (on the balance of probabilities) that they were substantially disadvantaged by a provision, criterion or practice of the respondent.
• The claimant or tribunal has put forward an adjustment that it is alleged the respondent should have made, in sufficient detail to enable the respondent to deal with it.
• There is evidence that is at least capable of leading a tribunal to conclude that the proposed adjustment would be reasonable and would eliminate or reduce the disadvantage.

Once the above has been established the onus would then fall on the respondent to prove that the proposed adjustment was not reasonable or would not have eliminated or reduced the disadvantage to the claimant.