“Normal day-to-day activities”



There is no longer a statutory list of normal day-to-day activities. Instead, a claimant must satisfy the tribunal that their own normal day-to-day activities are adversely affected. It is what someone cannot do as a result of their impairment that must be assessed, not what they can do (Aderemi v London and South Eastern Railway Limited [2012] UKEAT/0316/12/KN). 



Both work and non-work activities can be “normal day-to-day activities”. A work activity is “normal” if it is found in a range of different work situations (for example, standing for long periods, reading or talking on the telephone). Under EU law, it includes all activities relevant to enabling a person to participate in working life. 



The test is whether it is a normal activity for most people – not for the person concerned. For example, playing the piano to concert standard would not be a normal day-to-day activity, even though it is normal for a concert pianist. 



Carrying out an assessment or exam can be a normal day-to-day activity (Paterson v Commissioner of Police and the Metropolis [2007] ICR 1522). So can doing police work on night shifts (Chief Constable of Dumfries & Galloway Constabulary v Adams [2009] IRLR 612).


Lifting and moving goods weighing up to 25kg, manually and using a pallet truck, was a day-to-day activity for a warehouse operative in Banaszczyk v Booker Limited [2015] UKEAT/0132/15/RN. The judge confirmed that EU law requires tribunals to take a broad approach when identifying “normal day-to-day activities” to ensure that the Directive’s social purpose is not defeated.




Conducting litigation on your own behalf and giving evidence in a tribunal are not normal day-to-day activities, because these are not things people normally do in the course of their professional life (Herry v Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council [2016] UKEAT 0101/16/1612).