Claimant v Bristol City Council
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the dismissal was procedurally unfair but not substantively unfair, and ordered re-engagement. The claimant was awarded back pay from 1 February 2024.
Multiple allegations of direct race discrimination were considered including denial of job evaluation, exclusion from training email, and delays in grievance process. The tribunal did not uphold any of the race discrimination claims after careful consideration of the evidence.
The claimant alleged victimisation including exclusion from job evaluation training email. The tribunal did not find that the treatment was because of a protected act.
Claims of detriment following protected disclosures were considered. The tribunal did not uphold the whistleblowing detriment claims.
The claimant was awarded back pay, which was agreed between the parties, indicating success on the wages claim.
Facts
Mrs Abuayyash worked for Bristol City Council's Resettlement Team initially engaged in 2019 as a casual worker replacing another staff member. She later had her employment status confirmed as employee in November 2022. She brought claims of race discrimination, victimisation, whistleblowing detriment, unfair dismissal and unlawful deduction of wages. The original hearing took place over 9 days in March 2025 before a full tribunal panel. The claimant applied for reconsideration of the judgment on 25 separate grounds.
Decision
The tribunal refused the reconsideration application, finding no reasonable prospect of the original judgment being varied or revoked. The judge addressed all 25 grounds systematically, finding they either mischaracterized the tribunal's findings, raised matters that could have been dealt with at the original hearing, or simply reflected disagreement with findings of fact. The principles of finality in litigation and that reconsideration is not an opportunity to re-argue matters were applied.
Practical note
Reconsideration applications must identify genuine errors of law or fact that could not have been raised at the original hearing - mere disagreement with findings or alternative interpretations of evidence are insufficient to meet the interests of justice test.
Legal authorities cited
Case details
- Case number
- 6000618/2023
- Decision date
- 1 October 2025
- Hearing type
- reconsideration
- Hearing days
- 9
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Name
- Bristol City Council
- Sector
- local government
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Senior Support Worker
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No