Cases2301854/2023

Claimant v Rainsford Contracts Limited

16 July 2024Before Employment Judge SudraLondon Southhybrid

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Direct Discrimination(race)failed

The tribunal found no evidence that the decision to dismiss the claimant was in any part due to his race. Mr Dennis had hired the claimant knowing his racial origin (Arab/Lebanese) and chose him over an English applicant. The dismissal was based on the claimant's conduct: sending unprofessional and rude emails to colleagues and the client, issuing ultimatums, micromanaging colleagues, and flagrantly disregarding explicit management instructions not to email the client. The tribunal concluded that Mr Dennis would have treated any employee, irrespective of race, in the same way for such conduct.

Facts

The claimant, a Lebanese project manager, was employed for just 18 days (23 January to 10 February 2023) before being dismissed during his probationary period. He was hired to manage a conversion project and develop relations with the main contractor CIRC to secure future work. Within days of starting, the claimant engaged in unprofessional conduct: sending rude emails to colleagues and the client (including late at night), issuing ultimatums to management, micromanaging a quantity surveyor, and flagrantly disregarding explicit management instructions not to email the client. After repeated warnings and attempts to resolve matters, the managing director dismissed him, concerned the claimant jeopardised the relationship with CIRC.

Decision

The tribunal unanimously dismissed the race discrimination claim. The tribunal found the claimant's dismissal was entirely due to his unprofessional conduct and not his Arab/Lebanese origin. The managing director had knowingly hired the claimant over an English applicant, demonstrating no racial animus. The tribunal concluded that any employee, regardless of race, would have been treated the same way for such conduct. The burden of proof did not shift to the respondent, but even if it had, the respondent satisfied the tribunal that race played no part in the decision.

Practical note

A short service dismissal during probation for documented unprofessional conduct (inappropriate emails, insubordination, damaging client relations) will defeat a race discrimination claim where the employer hired the claimant knowing their racial origin and there is no evidence race influenced the dismissal decision.

Legal authorities cited

Madarassy v Nomura International Plc [2007] ICR 867Igen v Wong [2005] ICR 931Qureshi v London Borough of Newham [1991] IRLR 264Hewage v GHB [2012] ICR 1054Martin v Devonshires Solicitors [2011] ICR 352Laing v Manchester City Council [2006] IRLR 748Fraser v University Leicester UK EAT/1055/13Efobi v Royal Mail Group Ltd [2021] UKSC 33

Statutes

Equality Act 2010 section 136Equality Act 2010 section 13Equality Act 2010 section 23(1)

Case details

Case number
2301854/2023
Decision date
16 July 2024
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
4
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
construction
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
Project Manager

Claimant representation

Represented
No