Claimant v T5 Operating Company Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the dismissal was unfair. The tribunal was unable to say there was any percentage chance the claimant would have been dismissed in any event, indicating the respondent failed to follow fair procedures or lacked substantive grounds for dismissal.
The claimant's claim for breach of contract in relation to notice pay was well-founded, indicating the respondent failed to provide proper notice or payment in lieu of notice upon termination.
The tribunal found the claimant's claim for direct race discrimination was not well-founded and dismissed it, concluding the evidence did not establish that race was a factor in the treatment complained of.
The tribunal found the claimant's complaint of victimisation was not well-founded and dismissed it, determining that the claimant had not established he was subjected to detriment because of a protected act.
Facts
Mr Ifrim was employed by T5 Operating Company Limited and was dismissed. He brought claims for unfair dismissal, breach of contract regarding notice pay, direct race discrimination, and victimisation. The respondent failed to comply with the ACAS Code on disciplinary procedures during the dismissal process.
Decision
The tribunal found the unfair dismissal and breach of contract claims succeeded, awarding £8,788.49 including a 10% ACAS uplift. The race discrimination and victimisation claims failed. No Polkey reduction or contributory fault was applied.
Practical note
Failure to follow the ACAS Code can result in a 10% uplift even where discrimination claims fail, and lack of fair procedure can prevent any Polkey reduction being applied.
Award breakdown
Adjustments
Respondent unreasonably failed to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures 2015
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3303007/2024
- Decision date
- 10 September 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No