Claimant v HM Prison and Probation Service

Tribunal found no repudiatory breach of the implied term of trust and confidence or duty to conduct a fair disciplinary process. The disciplinary investigation and process were fair and in accordance with ACAS Code. The claimant resigned after accepting alternative employment before the appeal outcome was known. The appeal outcome upholding Allegation 3 (leaving building to go to car before shift end without informing colleague) was a reasonable disciplinary outcome, not a breach.

Claims based on conduct occurring on or before 11 January 2024 were presented out of time. There was no conduct extending over a period and it was not just and equitable to extend time. Claims dismissed on jurisdiction grounds. On merits, Tribunal found comparators (Donna Hughes and Brian Harry) were not in materially the same circumstances. Disciplinary process was unrelated to claimant's disability.

Claims based on conduct occurring on or before 11 January 2024 were presented out of time. Tribunal held it was not just and equitable to extend time. Claims dismissed on jurisdiction grounds. On merits, Tribunal found the disciplinary process was not instigated in bad faith and was not because of the claimant's need for reasonable adjustments. The process was objectively fair and followed policy.

Claims based on conduct occurring on or before 11 January 2024 were presented out of time and dismissed on jurisdiction grounds. On merits, Tribunal found the claimant had been provided with a footrest and adjustable monitor. Regarding the ergonomic chair, the claimant failed to provide measurements requested by respondent after DSE assessment. Tribunal found no breach of duty to make reasonable adjustments. Claimant's evidence on this issue was not credible.