Claimant v Secretary of State for the Home Office
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the reason for dismissal was capability (a potentially fair reason) due to prolonged sickness absence. The respondent acted reasonably: Mrs Clifford genuinely believed the claimant was no longer capable; made reasonable efforts to consult him and offered collaborative arrangements for meetings which he did not take up; the claimant had been continuously absent for 13 months with no prospect of return; and dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses in the circumstances.
The tribunal found that the alleged PCP (arranging meetings in a non-collaborative way) was not established. The respondent did in fact take a collaborative approach by asking the claimant for dates to avoid, offering choices of dates, and giving him opportunities to say if he could not attend or to provide written representations. The claimant did not engage constructively or provide alternative dates. Therefore the respondent had in fact taken the steps the claimant suggested as reasonable adjustments.
Facts
The claimant, a systems engineer employed since June 2014, was dismissed for capability on 29 December 2023 after 13 months of continuous sickness absence due to mental health conditions (depression and anxiety). The claimant alleged the relationship with the employer had broken down and refused to engage with absence management meetings or occupational health assessments, claiming the arrangements were not collaborative. He also had ongoing grievances about pay disputes and a disciplinary process. The respondent offered multiple opportunities for meetings and OH assessments, including offering choice of dates and the option to provide written representations.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed both claims. The unfair dismissal claim failed because the respondent acted reasonably: the reason was capability; Mrs Clifford genuinely believed the claimant could not perform his duties; reasonable efforts were made to consult; and dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses after 13 months continuous absence with no prospect of return. The reasonable adjustments claim failed because the alleged PCP was not established — the respondent did take a collaborative approach to arranging meetings, which the claimant did not engage with constructively.
Practical note
An employer can fairly dismiss for capability after prolonged sickness absence even without up-to-date medical evidence if the employee persistently refuses to engage with the absence management process despite reasonable efforts by the employer to accommodate them, including offering collaborative scheduling and alternative means of participation.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2218551/2024
- Decision date
- 6 June 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 7
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- central government
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Systems Engineer
- Service
- 10 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No