Cases6000487/2024

Claimant v SKF UK Ltd

9 April 2025Before Employment Judge Mr G. KingBristolin person

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalfailed

The tribunal found dismissal was for gross misconduct (failure to attend work for 5 days without authorisation after three managers refused additional leave, and serious insubordination). The tribunal concluded the respondent had reasonable grounds to believe this amounted to gross misconduct, the investigation and disciplinary process were reasonable (any procedural defects were cured on appeal), and dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses.

Direct Discrimination(religion)failed

The tribunal found no prima facie case of discrimination. The decision to refuse extra leave was made before the respondent knew it was for a religious course. The tribunal was satisfied the claimant was dismissed for unauthorised absence and insubordination, not for his religious beliefs, and that any employee taking 5 days unauthorised leave would have been treated the same way regardless of religion.

Facts

The claimant, a Scientologist, requested an extra week's unpaid leave to complete a religious purification course in Hungary. Three managers refused due to business needs (an influx of time-sensitive aerospace orders). The claimant took the leave anyway, absent without authorisation for 5 days (21-25 August 2023). He was investigated, subjected to a disciplinary hearing, dismissed for gross misconduct (unauthorised absence and serious insubordination), and his appeal was dismissed.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed both claims. The unfair dismissal claim failed because dismissal for gross misconduct (5 days unauthorised absence after clear refusal and warning) was within the band of reasonable responses and followed a fair procedure. The religion discrimination claim failed because the refusal of leave occurred before the respondent knew it was for a religious course, and the tribunal found the claimant was dismissed for misconduct, not his beliefs.

Practical note

An employee's honest disclosure of a religious reason for taking unauthorised leave does not prevent dismissal for gross misconduct where the employee was explicitly refused leave for legitimate business reasons and chose to ignore clear management instructions to attend work.

Legal authorities cited

Ayodele v Citylink Ltd & Anor [2017] EWCA Civ 1913Abernethy v Mott, Hay and Anderson [1974] ICR 323Madarassy v Nomura International Plc [2007] ICR 867Efobi v Royal Mail Group Ltd [2021] UKSC 33Kelly v Royal Mail Group Ltd EAT 0262/18Iceland Frozen Foods v Jones [1983] ICR 17Taylor v OCS Group Ltd [2006] ICR 602Nagarajan v London Regional Transport [2000] 1 AC 501

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.98Equality Act 2010 s.136

Case details

Case number
6000487/2024
Decision date
9 April 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
2
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
manufacturing
Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister