Claimant v Currie Motors UK Limited

The tribunal found that the final written warning for two car accidents was a fundamental breach of contract. The respondent incorrectly treated the accidents as potential gross misconduct warranting summary dismissal, when they should have been treated as ordinary misconduct under the company's own policy. The sanction was disproportionate, left the claimant isolated without her manager's knowledge, and was likely to destroy or seriously damage trust and confidence without reasonable or proper cause. The claimant resigned promptly within two weeks.

In October 2020, the claimant's line manager Mrs Davy made a comment in a racial context when asking the claimant to contact a black colleague, suggesting 'you people understand each other' or that there was 'some sort of code' between them. This was unwanted conduct related to race which created an offensive working environment. Mrs Davy immediately apologised when challenged, and the tribunal extended time on just and equitable grounds because the respondent admitted the facts and there was no prejudice from the delay.

The claimant alleged race discrimination in relation to a colleague Ana receiving a pay rise in 2020 which she did not receive, and in relation to the final written warning and fine. The tribunal found no less favourable treatment: Ana's circumstances were materially different (the job advert matched her role, not the claimant's). The disciplinary sanction was consistent with the respondent's treatment of other employees in similar accident cases regardless of race. There was no evidence that race was a factor in any of the decisions.

The claimant alleged victimisation in relation to the final written warning, fine and constructive dismissal following her protected act (complaint about Mrs Davy's racial comment in October 2020). The tribunal found the disciplinary action was not out of the ordinary and there was no basis to infer it related to an incident two years earlier. The respondent's treatment was consistent with how it dealt with other car accident cases and there was no evidence linking the disciplinary action to the earlier discrimination complaint.

The claimant challenged a deduction of £219 from her final pay related to the CBS car lease scheme. The tribunal found that monthly deductions were made in arrears, the claimant had the car for 8 months and 8 monthly payments were made. The payments were approved under the terms of the agreement with CBS and therefore there was no unlawful deduction from wages.