Progressive conditions 




There are special rules for progressive conditions (Schedule 1, Paragraph 8 EA 10). Someone with a progressive condition is protected once there is evidence that the condition has some adverse effect on ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities, as long as the evidence shows that in future, the adverse effect is likely to be substantial. 




Type 2 Diabetes, as a progressive condition, can amount to a disability even if the condition is not yet having a substantial adverse effect at the time of the negative treatment, as long as the medical evidence shows that such an effect is likely in the future (Taylor v Ladbrokes Betting and Gaming Limited [2016] UKEAT 0353/15/1612).



A future adverse effect is “likely” to be substantial if it “could well” occur (SCA Packaging Limited v Boyle and the Equality and Human Rights Commission [2009] IRLR 747). The question is not what might happen in the population as a whole, but what the medical evidence suggests is likely for a particular claimant (Taylor v Ladbrokes Betting and Gaming Limited [2016] UKEAT 0353/15/1612). 


Treating someone less favourably because of a mistaken assumption that their condition is likely to deteriorate in the future (that is, a mistaken assumption that someone’s condition is a progressive disability) can be perceived direct disability discrimination (Chief Constable of Norfolk v Coffey [2017] UKEAT/0260/16). See also Perceived disability, below.