Mr A Hill v Royal Mail Group Limited — 2021

The respondent accepted that the claimant was disabled by reason of depression, stress and anxiety. The tribunal found that, after Occupational Health advised that the claimant was fit to return on a phased basis and recommended support in meetings, the respondent did not fully take that advice into account at the 25 October 2018 meeting. The claimant's s15 claim succeeded only because he was then required to remain at home and submit sick notes despite being ready and willing to return, and the respondent had not shown that this unfavourable treatment was justified.

The reasonable-adjustments claim also succeeded only in relation to the 25 October 2018 meeting. The tribunal found that the respondent should have given clearer notice of the agenda and permitted the claimant to be accompanied by a trade union representative, given the Occupational Health recommendations. The tribunal rejected the other alleged PCPs, including the allegations about return to Bromsgrove, alternative hours, alternative line manager, attendance at later investigation meetings, and time to consider documents.

The tribunal dismissed the harassment claim, finding that the alleged comments and the 25 October meeting did not amount to harassment related to disability. It also dismissed the unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal complaints. The tribunal found that the reason for dismissal was gross misconduct, that the respondent had reasonably concluded the claimant had behaved abusively towards managers including making a racially abusive comment to Mr Ali, and that dismissal without notice was within the range of reasonable responses after investigation and appeal.