Claimant v Health Vision UK Limited

The tribunal found the dismissal was for a potentially fair reason (conduct/gross misconduct) and that the respondent had a genuine belief based on reasonable grounds following an investigation. However, the procedure was flawed in multiple respects: the claimant was not provided with a voice recording of a call with Angela that Mr Hassan listened to; a more detailed statement was before Mr Doherty at appeal that had not been shared with the claimant; an additional allegation appeared at appeal without explanation; and there was a lack of documentation recording reasoning at investigation, disciplinary and appeal stages. These procedural failings rendered the dismissal unfair.

The claimant's notice pay claim failed because the tribunal found he would have been dismissed for gross misconduct in any event, entitling the respondent to dismiss without notice. Other alleged breaches (re badge, contract type) were either not properly pleaded, had no consequential loss, or were accepted by the claimant at the time.

The claimant asserted he was dismissed for reasons related to his age (over 40) and mobile phone provision to younger employees. The tribunal found he was dismissed for conduct, unconnected to age. The claimant's age group was the most populous among the respondent's employees. The claimant failed to establish facts from which discrimination could be inferred under the Igen test.

The claim was vague and non-specific, lacking detail of dates, times, places or participants despite judicial direction to clarify. The respondent had no knowledge of the claimant's branch of Christianity or observance. The claimant failed to establish facts from which discrimination could be inferred under the Igen test.

The claimant stated the respondent discriminated against him because he was studying to become a teacher and applying for British citizenship, but failed to identify what the treatment was or its consequences. The claim was not properly made out and failed.

The alleged comment by Gloria ('you are getting old') occurred in September/October 2022, substantially outside the statutory three-month time limit. The claimant contacted ACAS on 5 August 2023. The incident was discrete, unconnected to other allegations, and the claimant failed to provide reasons why time should be extended on just and equitable grounds. The claim was struck out as out of time.