Neurodiversity Rights: What the Capgemini ADHD Tribunal Case Reveals About Reasonable Adjustments

Published : August 20, 2025

Neurodiversity rights have been highlighted again after a senior employee with ADHD wasn’t provided the necessary adjustments before her dismissal. The employment tribunal ruled in her favour, noting that staff training could have improved workplace understanding and reduced the disadvantage she faced.

Below, we examine what went wrong and how employers can go about supporting neurodivergent employees. We then discuss how others can request reasonable adjustments, should they be required, and the steps they can take if their employer fails to fulfil its duty.

Need legal advice on your employment situation? Contact Redmans Solicitors now. As specialists in the employment sector, our team can assess your circumstances, answer your queries and provide expert advice.

It only takes a moment to discover how we can help you, simply:

Neurodiversity Rights in the Workplace: Ms Khorram v Capgemini UK

A Promising Career Meets Hidden Challenges

Ms Bahar Khorram (“the Claimant”) began working as the presales market lead for Capgemini UK Plc (“the Respondent”) on 5 June 2023. She had 25 years of experience, having studied and worked in the US before moving to London. At the time of her employment, she was on a £120,000 annual salary with additional benefits.

Prior to starting her role, she was assessed as showing “mixed anxiety and depressive” traits and was subsequently diagnosed with ADHD. During proceedings, she explained how her condition meant she could struggle to maintain focus in unstructured environments and overcomplicate tasks.

Not long into her six-month probation, the Claimant began to find her work challenging. She was assigned multiple projects with tight deadlines that required extensive multitasking. Unfortunately, despite asking for a reduction from her line manager, Mr Steve Baldwin, he simply suggested that she wasn’t taking her work seriously or managing it properly.

Seeking Support But Faced With Dismissal

The Claimant consequently disclosed her ADHD diagnosis and the impact it was having on her work. After an occupational health assessment in October 2023, a list of potential adjustments, including ADHD awareness training, was recommended. The neurodivergent employee sought to implement these adjustments, proposing to Mr Baldwin that he attend the training.

Nonetheless, her invitation went unanswered, after which the Claimant took two weeks of sick leave, a week of annual leave, and then inquired about a role change. By early January 2024, she also informed HR of her intention to pursue a grievance.

On 29 January, the Claimant was invited to a probation review meeting, scheduled for 31 January. The following day, she raised a formal grievance, claiming that there was a “palpable tension between herself and Mr Baldwin.” She labelled his demeanour “intimidating,” and alleged that she’d been “bullied and discriminated against.”

The probation review meeting then proceeded as scheduled on 31 January, without the neurodivergent employee being present. Despite the Respondent having previously reassured her about this meeting, her employment was immediately terminated on 2 February. The Respondent cited ongoing performance concerns and the timing of her grievance, having only been raised the day before this meeting, as the reasons for her dismissal.

Neurodiversity Rights and Tribunal Victory

When her grievance was largely dismissed, the Claimant appealed the decision before pursuing an employment tribunal case. Among her claims, she alleged a failure to make reasonable adjustments and harassment relating to disability.

While the employment tribunal dismissed most of her claims, it upheld her claim that the Respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments by not providing neurodiversity training and assigning achievable, realistic tasks. The Claimant now awaits the remedy for her successful claims.

Managing ADHD Employees: Reasonable Adjustments in Practice

Under the Equality Act 2010, employees with a legally defined disability—a physical or mental impairment that has a long-term, substantial adverse effect on their ability to perform regular daily activities—are entitled to reasonable adjustments.

Employers determine the reasonableness of adjustments based on several factors, including the affordability and practicality of implementation, as well as whether they effectively mitigate the disadvantage a disabled individual experiences compared to their non-disabled colleagues.

When managing ADHD employees, some reasonable adjustments that could potentially be established include:

  • A quiet working space that removes noise and other distractions,
  • Flexible working arrangements, including the option to work from home, and
  • ADHD training to improve workplace understanding.

Notably, each situation will be unique. Individual needs, workplace environments, and available resources will vary, so reasonable adjustments must be tailored to both the employee and the employer’s circumstances. The examples above aren’t exhaustive, and maintaining an open and flexible approach to identifying and implementing adjustments is essential to upholding neurodiversity rights in the workplace.

Supporting Neurodivergent Employees: How to Request Reasonable Adjustments

Requesting reasonable adjustments is just one of the many neurodiversity rights available to individuals with conditions such as ADHD. That being said, knowing how to ask isn’t always easy or obvious.

Crucially, if a neurodivergent employee believes they’re entitled to such adjustments and would like support, they should contact their employer as soon as possible. This is because, while employers are legally obliged to provide adjustments to those eligible, this duty only arises when they become aware of, or ought to have known about, one’s condition.

Requests can be made orally, in writing, or through an employer’s established process. However, it’s generally recommended to submit a written request to maintain a clear record.

Individuals can outline their condition, describe the challenges they face, and suggest potential adjustments that may help. Follow-up discussions between employees and employers allow both parties to agree on the most suitable adjustments and ensure they are effectively implemented.

Ultimately, the goal is to create a supportive environment that enables employees to perform at their best. Open, clear, and timely communication is key to making the process as smooth and effective as possible.

Neurodiversity Rights When Adjustments Aren’t Made

Even where an employee has requested reasonable adjustments, there are times when employers may fail to implement them. In such situations, it’s usually best to raise the matter with a manager or HR in the first instance. Often, misunderstandings or oversights can be resolved quickly through informal discussion.

If the issue remains unresolved, the next step is typically to raise a formal grievance. This signals to the employer that the matter must be addressed seriously and, if handled effectively, can prevent the stress and cost of escalating to legal proceedings.

Where internal processes don’t bring a resolution, an employee may need to consider bringing an employment tribunal claim. Before doing so, however, Acas early conciliation must first be initiated.

At every stage, seeking legal advice is strongly recommended. Expert guidance can help employees understand their options, make informed decisions, and work towards the best possible outcome.

Get Help with Redmans

If you have any questions about neurodiversity rights or want ADHD legal advice on employment, contact Redmans Solicitors without delay. Our team of specialist employment lawyers are here to help, and following a brief consultation, we can provide expert advice.

To begin, please:

The information on this page is intended for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.