In Person For the v Respondent — 2024

Mr David worked for Jaguar Landrover Limited from 2 July 2018 and moved into the MOS team on 1 June 2021 after a restructuring. The tribunal found there was no agreed redundancy package or promise that he would be able to take redundancy if the role did not work out. It also recorded that his unpaid holiday pay and unpaid notice pay claims had been withdrawn at the 1 December 2022 hearing before Judge Kelly and dismissed by her judgment, and that he had confirmed he was not pursuing a statutory redundancy payment.

The tribunal found that Ms Samantha Humphreys raised performance concerns in November 2021 after seeing problems in the claimant's work, that the claimant refused to engage with the informal management process, and that OH referrals, DSE equipment and other support were provided once sciatica and later stress and anxiety were disclosed. It accepted that the grievance process took longer than ideal because of HR issues, but found that Mr Kevin Burton investigated the grievance and properly rejected it on 6 July 2022.

The direct race discrimination, harassment and victimisation claims all failed. The tribunal found no facts linking the complained-of conduct to Mr David's Romanian nationality, held that the comparator evidence did not establish less favourable treatment, and noted that race was not raised in the grievance. It also found no detriment caused because of a protected act, and concluded that the grievance would have been handled the same way.

On disability, the tribunal accepted that Mr David was disabled by sciatica from December 2021 and depression and anxiety from January 2022, but held that the reasonable adjustments duty was not engaged because the respondent did not then have sufficient knowledge of disability. In any event, it found that the respondent promptly referred him to OH, supplied DSE equipment and complied with recommendations. On dismissal and contract, the tribunal held that the resignation on 8 July 2022 was not a constructive dismissal because there was no repudiatory breach or breach of mutual trust and confidence; the year-end rating, the grievance outcome and the other matters relied on as last straws did not change that, and the freestanding breach of contract claim failed.