Employer ordered to pay £200,000 after dismissing worker because of ADHD

An employer has been ordered to pay more than £200,000 after an employment tribunal found that it dismissed a member of staff because she had ADHD.

The decision demonstrates that an employee does not necessarily need a formal diagnosis before receiving protection under the Equality Act 2010. Employers may have responsibilities where managers know about a condition or are aware of symptoms affecting an employee’s work.

Employee Dismissed Following ADHD Disclosure

Roberta Ghiotto was employed by Hawkwell House Hotel Limited as a Talent and Culture Coordinator. She performed well in the employee-wellbeing aspects of the position but found administrative duties, including payroll work, more challenging.

Her ADHD affected her concentration, focus and time management, particularly when she worked in noisy surroundings or under pressure. The tribunal found that several managers knew about her condition and its effects.

After a new general manager was appointed, Ghiotto’s probation was extended following concerns about her administrative work. The tribunal found that the manager knew about her difficulties but failed to provide adequate training or support.

Ghiotto disclosed that she had ADHD during a probation meeting in March 2024. The manager then obtained external advice and was mistakenly advised that she would not be protected under the Equality Act without a formal diagnosis.

She was dismissed before completing her extended probation. The tribunal found a clear connection between her disclosure and the decision to dismiss her.

Her claims for direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability and failure to make reasonable adjustments all succeeded.

Tribunal Finds Employer Failed To Make Reasonable Adjustments

The tribunal identified several adjustments that could reasonably have been made, including additional training and support, some home working, a suitable quiet workspace and extra time for payroll duties.

It subsequently ordered the hotel to pay Ghiotto £200,252. This included compensation for financial losses, injury to feelings and psychiatric injury, together with interest and an adjustment for taxation.

The tribunal also awarded £5,000 in aggravated damages after finding that important notes of a meeting immediately preceding the dismissal had not been disclosed until the final day of the liability hearing. The employer was ordered to pay all Ghiotto’s legal costs, with the amount to be assessed separately.

What This Means For Employers

Employment Tribunal decisions depend on their individual facts and are not binding on other tribunals. Nevertheless, the case illustrates why employers should investigate whether performance difficulties may be connected to a disability and consider appropriate adjustments before taking disciplinary or dismissal action. Following incorrect external advice does not remove the employer’s responsibility.

This decision highlights the importance of recognising potential disabilities in the workplace and carefully considering reasonable adjustments before taking action in relation to performance or capability concerns. If you would like advice on disability discrimination, reasonable adjustments, managing performance issues or any other aspect of employment law, please contact us. We advise employers and HR professionals on a wide range of workplace issues, helping them manage risk and navigate complex employment law matters.

Case Details

Case: Roberta Ghiotto v Hawkwell House Hotel Limited
Tribunal: Employment Tribunal, Reading
Panel: Employment Judge Reindorf KC, Ms L Farrell and Mr A Morgan
Liability judgment: 23 December 2025
Remedy judgment: 17 July 2026
Case number: 6009226/2024

About the Author

David is a solicitor-advocate with higher rights of audience since 2014. He qualified as a solicitor in 2013 and joined Machins in 2019 after over a decade at BT and two years at a City law firm. David advises on all aspects of employment law and has represented clients in more than 150 tribunal hearings.