In March 2026, an employment tribunal awarded £7,720 to an unsuccessful job applicant after finding that the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust had failed to make reasonable adjustments for her anxiety during an interview. This article sets out what happened, what the law requires, and what organisations can do to make sure their hiring processes do not expose them to the same risk.

What Happened

Anahita Rezaei applied for the role of pathology operations manager at the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust in February 2024. On her application form, she disclosed that she had a mental health condition.

She was invited to interview. The interview started five minutes late, leaving her 35 minutes rather than the full 40. She was assessed by a panel of three, received the third highest score of six candidates, and was told by one of the panel members that another candidate had answered questions more “directly and succinctly”. She was told the rest of her interview was good and that she was otherwise considered appointable.

The top-scoring candidate was offered the role but declined. The position was then offered to the second-highest scorer. At no point did the hiring team revisit Rezaei’s interview performance in light of her earlier disclosure.

Following the interview, Rezaei wrote to the Trust’s Director of Workforce to explain that the late start had left her feeling rushed, that this had worsened her anxiety, and that it had affected her clarity of thought and speech during the interview.

The London Central Employment Tribunal ruled that the Trust had failed to make reasonable adjustments. It found that the interview panel was aware of the potential impact of her disability on her interview performance but took no steps to reconsider their assessment. The tribunal also noted that scoring sheets had only been retained for two of the three panel members - a record-keeping failure that compounded the employer’s position.

£7,720
Awarded to the claimant after the London Central Employment Tribunal found the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust had failed to make reasonable adjustments during the recruitment process - March 2026

What the Law Requires

Under the Equality Act 2010, employers have a duty to make reasonable adjustments for job applicants - not just employees. This duty applies throughout the entire recruitment process, from the application form to the interview to the final selection decision.

A reasonable adjustment is any change that removes or reduces the substantial disadvantage a disabled person would otherwise face. In a recruitment context, this might include:

Crucially, the duty to make adjustments does not only apply when a candidate formally requests one. Where an employer knows - or could reasonably be expected to know - that a candidate has a disability that may put them at a disadvantage, they are expected to consider what steps might be taken.

In this case, the Trust knew Rezaei had a mental health condition. When she disclosed that her anxiety had been exacerbated by circumstances on the day of the interview, the tribunal found there was a clear opportunity to reconsider - and that the failure to do so was a failure to make a reasonable adjustment.

Why This Case Matters Beyond the Headlines

It would be easy to read this case as an outlier - an unusual set of circumstances that most organisations are unlikely to face. That would be a mistake.

Employment lawyers commenting on the case have noted that claims of disability discrimination in the recruitment process are becoming increasingly common. As one employment partner observed, jobseekers are becoming more comfortable disclosing neurodiversity and disability during recruitment, which means more employers are being exposed to the risk of getting it wrong.

The problem is rarely bad intent. Most hiring teams genuinely want to recruit fairly. The problem is that most hiring processes were not designed with reasonable adjustments in mind. They were designed for speed, consistency, and a standardised experience - which is often exactly what disadvantages candidates whose disability affects their performance on a given day.

In this case, the adjustments that could have been made were not complex or expensive. The interview could have been reviewed. A further interview could have been offered. A simple conversation could have taken place. None of these things require significant resource - they require awareness, a clear process, and someone with the understanding and confidence to act on it.

“There is often pressure during the interview process to get roles filled, but it can be costly if you fail to fully consider reasonable adjustments during the process.”
Melanie Stancliffe, Employment Partner, Freeths - quoted in People Management, March 2026

Three Questions Every Employer Should Ask About Their Hiring Process

1. Do we have a clear process for how adjustment requests are handled during recruitment - including when they arise on the day of an interview?

Many organisations have an equal opportunities form and a general commitment to inclusive hiring. Very few have a step-by-step process for what happens when a candidate discloses a disability that may have affected their performance. This case illustrates exactly why that gap matters.

2. Are our hiring managers trained to recognise when an adjustment may be needed - even if a candidate hasn’t formally requested one?

The duty to make adjustments is proactive. Waiting for a candidate to raise a formal complaint is not a sufficient response. Managers involved in recruitment need to know what to look for, what questions to ask, and what options are available.

3. Are we keeping the right records - and would they stand up to scrutiny?

The tribunal in this case noted that scoring sheets were only retained for two of three panel members. Good record-keeping is not bureaucracy for its own sake - it is the evidence that demonstrates a fair and considered process. If you cannot show your reasoning, you cannot defend it.

How TWIC Can Help

At The Workplace Inclusion Consultancy we work with employers to make inclusive recruitment a practical reality rather than an aspiration.

Our Inclusive Recruitment Redesign service reviews your end-to-end hiring process - from job descriptions and application forms through to interview design, scoring, and decision-making - and rebuilds it to remove the structural barriers that disadvantage disabled and neurodivergent candidates. We help you put a clear, auditable reasonable adjustments process in place for recruitment, so that your team knows what to do when a situation like this arises.

Our Inclusive Manager Leading Minds training programme builds the knowledge and confidence your hiring managers need to handle disability disclosure, reasonable adjustment requests, and inclusive interview practice - not as a compliance exercise, but as a genuine skill.

We also offer a free interactive Reasonable Adjustments Explorer tool with over 100 adjustments to explore, searchable by impact in the workplace - a useful starting point for any employer unsure of what reasonable adjustment options are available.

Access the tool: You can explore our free Reasonable Adjustment Explorer - over 100 adjustments searchable by how a condition impacts someone at work.

A Final Thought

The Royal Marsden is a world-renowned specialist hospital. Its people team is almost certainly made up of skilled, experienced professionals who care about doing the right thing. This case is not evidence of an employer that doesn’t care about inclusion.

It is evidence of what happens when a good employer does not have the right framework in place for a situation it didn’t anticipate.

Most reasonable adjustments in recruitment are simple. Most of the risk is avoidable. And most of the employers we speak to are closer to getting it right than they think - they just need a clearer process.

If you’d like to talk through what that looks like for your organisation, we’d love to hear from you. You can get in touch here or email us at hello@theworkplaceinclusionconsultancy.com.