Claimant v Southeast Access Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the complaint of automatic unfair dismissal for making protected disclosures was not well-founded. The claim was dismissed after a three-day hearing where the tribunal heard evidence and submissions from both parties.
The tribunal found the complaint of direct sex discrimination was not well-founded. After considering the evidence presented over three days, the tribunal concluded there was no discrimination on grounds of sex.
The tribunal found the complaint of wrongful dismissal for notice pay was not well-founded. The claim for breach of contract in relation to notice period was dismissed.
Facts
James Pollard brought claims against Southeast Access Limited alleging automatic unfair dismissal for making protected disclosures (whistleblowing), direct sex discrimination, and wrongful dismissal for failure to pay notice. The case was heard over three days by video at London South Employment Tribunal. Mr Pollard represented himself while the respondent was represented by counsel.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all three claims brought by Mr Pollard. The tribunal found that the whistleblowing dismissal claim was not well-founded, the sex discrimination claim was not established, and the wrongful dismissal claim for notice pay failed. Oral reasons were given at the hearing.
Practical note
A self-represented claimant bringing automatic unfair dismissal, discrimination and wrongful dismissal claims against a represented employer failed on all counts after a three-day hearing, highlighting the challenges faced by litigants in person in complex multi-claim cases.
Case details
- Case number
- 2302013/2023
- Decision date
- 22 May 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- construction
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No