Employment Tribunal Cases Linked to Neurodiversity Almost Double in Five Years

The number of employment cases in UK linked to neurodivergent conditions has almost doubled since 2020, according to new analysis* of government data by national law firm Irwin Mitchell.

In 2020, HM Courts & Tribunals Service recorded 265 employment tribunal cases involving neurodivergent conditions. By 2025, the annual total had increased to 517 cases - a rise of around 95% over five years.

Analysis by Irwin Mitchell also highlights a sharp year on year increase of almost 19% between 2024 and 2025. The figures further show that the most recent six month period recorded the highest number of cases over the five-year period, underlining the pace at which claims are continuing to rise.

Autism and ADHD are now the most common conditions in tribunal cases, with both reaching record levels in 2025.

Across the year, autism related cases rose to 121, while ADHD cases climbed to 118, continuing a strong upward trend seen throughout the period. Together, the two conditions now account for a substantial share of all neurodiversity related tribunal claims.

Other key findings

• Dyslexia remains one of the most frequently cited conditions overall, having peaked in 2023. While case numbers fell back in 2024, they rose again in 2025, indicating continued prominence even if volumes remain below their earlier high.
• Tourette syndrome continues to feature at consistently high levels compared with most other conditions. Although growth has been less pronounced in recent years, it remains among the most commonly cited conditions in tribunal claims.
• Dyspraxia and OCD appear at lower levels but show signs of gradual growth. OCD, in particular, has increased compared with its 2020 baseline.
• Dyscalculia and dysgraphia remain the least cited conditions, with very low and sporadic numbers throughout the period.

Jenny Arrowsmith, an employment partner Irwin Mitchell, said:

“The steady rise in tribunal claims linked to neurodiversity should be a clear warning sign for employers. Many cases arise, not because of deliberate discrimination, but because businesses fail to recognise their legal obligations early enough.

“Employers need to move beyond a one size fits all approach. That means understanding when a condition may amount to a disability under the Equality Act, making reasonable adjustments to support the individual, and ensuring managers are trained to respond appropriately.

“Employees don’t need a formal diagnosis to obtain protection. If their condition has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day to day activities, they are disabled. This triggers the duty to make reasonable adjustments.

“It’s important not to make assumptions about what an employee needs. Not everyone with the same condition will benefit from the same adjustments.

“With conditions such as autism and ADHD increasingly cited in tribunal cases, organisations that do not review their policies, recruitment processes and day to day management practices risk exposing themselves to costly and avoidable claims.”

* This analysis was prepared by Irwin Mitchell in February 2026.