A landmark employment tribunal ruling has determined that employers can be sued for discrimination if they deny employees with agoraphobia the opportunity to work from home. The judgment states that compelling individuals suffering from this anxiety disorder—characterised by a fear of crowded spaces and difficulty leaving home—to attend the office may breach disability discrimination laws under UK employment legislation.
Case Background
The decision stems from a case involving Marina Dudding, a long-serving housing officer for Gravesham Borough Council in Kent. Ms Dudding, who has agoraphobia, was prohibited from working remotely two days per week upon her return from sick leave. She successfully sued the council for disability discrimination and unfair dismissal, and is now entitled to compensation.
The London South Employment Tribunal heard that Ms Dudding had worked for Gravesham Borough Council since September 2000, most recently as an allocations officer in the housing options service. She worked 37 hours per week, and from 2021, following the COVID-19 pandemic, she worked two days a week from home.
Impact of Agoraphobia
The tribunal noted: "Due to her Generalized Anxiety Disorder and Moderate Depressive Episode, [Ms Dudding] experiences symptoms of agoraphobia which makes it difficult for her to leave her home. When having to leave the house, [she] finds it very stressful and becomes anxious, she has palpitations and abdominal pain on her way out to her destination."
Her lawyer explained why she preferred working from home: "When working from the office, [Ms Dudding] is interrupted with the performance of her duties, as colleagues can come forward to interact with [her] to ask questions or raise concerns which would add further stress and anxiety. Having to work from the office causes [her] to feel chest pain or rapid heart rate, nausea, hyperventilation or trouble breathing."
During office hours, Ms Dudding found it increasingly difficult to concentrate due to the noisy environment, leading to heightened anxiety and occasional anxiety attacks. She often had to isolate in rest rooms for up to 15 minutes to reduce her anxiety. In contrast, working from home allowed her to focus in a quiet environment and manage her stress, positively impacting her performance.
Disciplinary Actions and Dismissal
Ms Dudding was on sick leave from March to July 2023 due to an inability to leave home. She attributed her absence to work-related stress, high blood pressure, and anxiety. Upon returning on a phased basis, she failed to attend an appraisal meeting in October 2023, triggering a disciplinary investigation over concerns about complaints regarding her telephone conduct.
The tribunal heard that from 24 October 2023, the council imposed an office-only requirement by revoking her established hybrid working arrangement. This requirement continued without a review mechanism or time limit, expecting her to attend the office daily. Ms Dudding emailed managers about the "severe negative impact" on her health. Further investigations followed, and she took sick leave in January 2024, receiving a final written warning in March.
When she attempted to return in April 2024, her hybrid work was not reinstated, causing her distress. She also requested a later start time of 11:30 am due to her condition. After unsuccessful discussions, she was dismissed, with management claiming she needed in-office support and oversight that could not be achieved remotely.
Tribunal Findings
Ms Dudding brought the case to tribunal and won two disability discrimination claims, one indirect disability discrimination claim, and unfair dismissal. She is now in line for compensation.
Employment Judge Caoimhe O'Neill stated: "The Tribunal finds that each impairment, namely GAD, MDE and agoraphobia, had a substantial adverse effect on [Ms Dudding's] ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities throughout the material period. [Gravesham Borough Council] knew, or in any event ought reasonably to have known, of [Ms Dudding's] agoraphobia from May 2023 upon receipt of Occupational Health advice and [Ms Dudding] emails."
The judge added that from November 2023, Ms Dudding sent numerous emails explaining how the amended working pattern worsened her health, providing a clear audit trail. The council repeatedly argued that in-person oversight and daily office attendance were operationally necessary, but this rationale was advanced without reference to her personal characteristics and lacked evidentiary foundation, especially as hybrid working remained available to other team members.
