Case 1305853/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Jatinder Dhaliwal v Jaguar Land Rover Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 1305853/2019
- Decision date
- 5 April 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Routley Representation
- Venue
- West Midlands
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Jatinder Dhaliwal
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant was employed by Jaguar Land Rover Limited from 16 April 2011 until his dismissal on 14 February 2019. He was dismissed for gross misconduct following allegations that he verbally and physically harassed a colleague, Mohammed Abdo. The Tribunal found that the reason for dismissal related to conduct, which was a potentially fair reason under section 98(2)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The Tribunal found that the Respondent had a genuine belief that the Claimant had committed misconduct, had reasonable grounds for that belief, and had carried out a reasonable investigation. It noted that several colleagues had supported Mr Abdo's account, that the Claimant had not denied the allegations during the internal process, and that the Respondent interviewed the complainant, the Claimant and a number of relevant witnesses.
The Tribunal also found that the process was procedurally fair. The Claimant was invited to meetings, given documentation, made aware of the case against him, accompanied by a trade union representative, and given two opportunities to appeal. The Tribunal concluded that dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses, taking account of the seriousness of the conduct, the safety-critical environment, the Respondent's Dignity at Work policy, the Claimant's leadership role, and the mitigation raised by the Claimant.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the Respondent did not unfairly dismiss the Claimant and that the claim is dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.94 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.98 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.98(2)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996
- BHS v Burchell 1978 IRLR 379
- range of reasonable responses
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.