Claimant v Element Materials Technology Aerospace UK Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the respondent had a fair reason for dismissal and followed a fair procedure. The dismissal fell within the band of reasonable responses available to a reasonable employer.
The tribunal found that the respondent did not breach the implied term of trust and confidence such that the claimant was entitled to resign and treat himself as constructively dismissed.
The tribunal found that the claimant was not dismissed for making protected disclosures. The principal reason for dismissal was unrelated to any alleged whistleblowing.
The tribunal found that the claimant was not subjected to any detriment for making protected disclosures. Either the disclosures were not protected or the detriments were not causally linked to the disclosures.
The tribunal found that the respondent was contractually entitled to make the deductions from wages or that the sums were properly withheld.
The tribunal found that the claimant had been paid all holiday pay to which he was entitled or had not accrued unpaid holiday at termination.
The tribunal found no breach of section 10 of the Employment Relations Act 1999 regarding the right to be accompanied at disciplinary or grievance hearings.
Facts
Mr Roberts brought multiple claims against Element Materials Technology Aerospace UK Ltd including unfair dismissal, constructive dismissal, automatic unfair dismissal for whistleblowing, detriment for making protected disclosures, unlawful deduction of wages, failure to pay holiday pay, and breach of the right to be accompanied. The case was heard over four days before a full tribunal panel.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all of the claimant's claims. The tribunal found that any dismissal was fair and within the band of reasonable responses, that the claimant was not constructively dismissed, was not dismissed or subjected to detriment for whistleblowing, and that there were no unlawful wage deductions or unpaid holiday pay.
Practical note
Multiple whistleblowing claims combined with wage and dismissal claims were all unsuccessful, highlighting the difficulty claimants face in establishing causation between protected disclosures and subsequent treatment or dismissal.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1308904/2023
- Decision date
- 6 November 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 4
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- aerospace
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep