Claimant v City Property (Glasgow) LLP

The tribunal found no material difference between the claimant and her comparators (Ms Kelly and Mr Gauld) in relation to work allocation. The claimant's suspension and dismissal related to her GDPR breach, and the tribunal concluded a hypothetical white comparator would have been treated identically. No facts were established from which race discrimination could be inferred.

While a conversation about Christmas trees may have been related to race or belief, the tribunal found it was not intended to harass and was light-hearted. The claimant did not indicate it was unwelcome, and it was not objectively reasonable for it to have had the effect claimed. Other alleged conduct was either not proven or not related to race.

The tribunal accepted the claimant had done protected acts (bullying complaints and RICS report in May 2023), but found the subsequent suspension and dismissal were due to her GDPR breach in sending confidential recruitment information to RICS, not the protected acts. The claimant was not ostracised or denied APC support because of the protected acts.

The tribunal found the reason for dismissal was the claimant's breach of GDPR (a potentially fair reason relating to conduct). The respondent carried out a reasonable investigation and followed a fair procedure. The decision to dismiss fell within the range of reasonable responses, given the seriousness of the breach, the claimant's lack of insight, and the trust required in handling confidential information.

The tribunal found no evidence of unauthorised deduction from wages. An initial overpayment was repaid by the claimant, and a subsequent adjustment for accrued holiday pay was made in her favour. Any confusion appeared to stem from administrative errors that were rectified.