For 18 months, a disciplinary process over using equipment without training consumed Ryan Toghill’s life. The Lidl deputy store manager, who had disclosed his ADHD diagnosis to his bosses, was dismissed for gross misconduct after a meeting where his manager cited a ‘lack of remorse’ — a trait the tribunal later linked directly to his condition.
“It was all I could think about for 18 months and more,” Toghill said. He successfully appealed the decision but was offered only a lower-paid role. He rejected it and took his case to an employment tribunal, which eventually awarded him more than £45,000.
“Lidl deputy store manager Ryan Toghill wins £45,000 after tribunal rules ADHD not properly considered.”
The judge found that Lidl had not fully taken his ADHD diagnosis into account during the disciplinary process. Reasonable adjustments, such as additional breaks, had not been offered. The tribunal also noted that the manager’s description of Toghill showing “a lack of remorse” was clearly linked with communication differences associated with having ADHD.
“I don’t show a lot of emotions,” Toghill explained. “I could be incredibly happy, angry, upset, or remorseful, and my facial expressions and tone of voice would essentially remain the same.”
The tribunal upheld parts of his claims for unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, and a failure to make reasonable adjustments. Lidl said it is “committed to ensuring that everyone receives the reasonable adjustments, clear communication and support they need to thrive.”
Campaigners, lawyers, and HR teams say cases like Toghill’s highlight a shift that businesses should be paying attention to. Thousands of people have been diagnosed as neurodivergent in the last few years — an umbrella term covering autism, ADHD, dyslexia, and Tourette’s syndrome. Since the pandemic, diagnosis rates for ADHD and autism have been rising, and they are featuring more regularly in employment tribunal disputes.
The Equality Act 2010 may give neurodivergent individuals protection by recognising their condition as a disability, even without a formal diagnosis, if they can show it has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on daily activities. Cases going to tribunal can involve failures to make adjustments, but also how people are treated at work. In a 2025 tribunal, a software engineer with ADHD was found to have faced discrimination because a manager sighed and made other expressions.
For Toghill, the case was all-consuming. “It was all I could think about for 18 months and more,” he repeated. Now, his victory serves as a warning to employers: ignoring neurodiversity can come at a significant cost.