Excellent experience start to finish – always very responsive to any queries and the turnaround on the property I was buying was very quick, even in the busy time leading up to stamp duty deadline. Jenny was always very helpful and went above and beyond to close on a short timescale.
It is common knowledge that cancer is considered to be a disability without the need to establish a substantial and long term effect as is otherwise required.
However in the case of Lofty –v- Hamis, the Claimant suffered from pre-cancerous lesions which ultimately could have resulted in skin cancer.
The Claimant received appropriate treatment, which proved successful in preventing her from having cancer, and therefore the employers made a decision that she could not have been deemed as disabled. The EAT disagreed.
The EAT held that the relevant point of determination is the point of diagnosis not the point after treatment had been received. It was argued that whereas it would not be sufficient that a claimant might develop the condition in the future, the law did not distinguish between invasive cancer and other forms of cancer.
So with conditions that are deemed to be a disability such as cancer, HIV and MS, employees should be more wary of steps they may be required to take, if for example there is a period of remission etc.
