A recent Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decision, F v J [2025] EAT 34, addresses the issue of anonymity in disability discrimination claims.
Case Summary:
The claimant, an academic, submitted a disability discrimination claim and sought an anonymity order to prevent public disclosure of his identity. He argued that revealing his disability could significantly harm his future employment prospects and potentially cause disruption if his students became aware of his condition.
The Employment Tribunal initially denied the anonymity request, setting a high evidential threshold by requiring the claimant to prove that his concerns were objectively well-founded.
The EAT overturned the tribunal’s decision, stating that the claimant only needed to demonstrate a reasonable basis for his belief that disclosure would be harmful. The EAT emphasised that it is inherently difficult to prove future consequences with certainty. The claimant had provided supporting evidence, including research on the stigma associated with disabilities in employment contexts.
The EAT concluded that the claimant’s fears were genuinely and reasonably held. It also noted that the principle of open justice was not significantly compromised by granting anonymity, as the substantive facts of the case would remain accessible. Consequently, the EAT ordered that both parties names would be anonymised throughout the proceedings to prevent indirect identification of the claimant.
This decision highlights the importance of balancing the open justice principle with the protection of individuals’ rights, particularly in relation to sensitive personal information.
