Claimant v Currys Group Limited

Claimant did not have the requisite minimum service (2 years continuous employment) to bring a claim for unfair dismissal. The claim was struck out as the claimant had worked for only approximately 2.5 months.

The tribunal found that the respondent's refusal of five weeks' holiday and the incident involving a colleague accompanying the claimant to search for a missing mug had nothing to do with the claimant's race or Pakistani nationality. The respondent had legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for its actions.

The tribunal found the claimant's allegations of sexual harassment by a colleague (Mrs Benguit) to be wholly incredible. Mrs Benguit asked innocuous questions about relationships during polite workplace conversation, did not ask about children, and did not engage in any inappropriate touching. The tribunal found her to be an impressive and honest witness.

The tribunal found that the respondent did not have the PCPs alleged by the claimant (one week only training, lunchtime-only breaks). Where PCPs existed (speed expectations, no probation appeal), they did not place the claimant at a substantial disadvantage because of his diabetes.

The tribunal found Mrs Benguit asked an innocuous question about the claimant's relationship status but did not ask why he had no children and did not engage in any unwanted physical contact. The claimant's allegations were found to be wholly incredible.

The tribunal upheld the claim for notice pay, finding the contract provided for one month's notice and there was no valid probationary period (despite the respondent's assertions). The tribunal rejected claims for unpaid bonuses and overtime, finding these were not contractually owed under the terms of the bonus scheme rules and established practice.