Mrs. Melaine Whittick v Initio Learning Trust (formally Wimbourne Academy Trust) — 2023

The tribunal accepted that Mrs Whittick was disabled throughout the relevant period, with adjustment disorder, anxiety and depression. It treated the case as involving three separate time periods for limitation purposes. Claims arising from the first disciplinary process in 2016-2018 and the grievance process in 2018 were held to be out of time and it was not just and equitable to extend time for them. Claims arising from the later pub-incident process from April 2019 to 31 August 2021 were also technically out of time, but time was extended because the delay was relatively short, there had been without prejudice discussions, and the balance of prejudice favoured hearing the claims.

The constructive unfair dismissal claim was dismissed. The tribunal found that the early disciplinary process was flawed: Mrs Whittick was placed on management leave without being told the allegations, was not given a clear single point of contact, and was left with an open-ended process in which the details of the allegations were delayed. It also found that Mrs West did not follow HR advice to slow the process and that repeated referrals to occupational health were not handled consistently with the clinician's advice. However, Mrs Whittick did not resign at that stage and instead raised a grievance, which the tribunal treated as affirmation of the contract. The later disciplinary and return-to-work process, including the handling of the 2019 pub incident and the eventual reversion to her substantive teacher post, was not found to have destroyed mutual trust and confidence.

The harassment claim succeeded in part only. The tribunal held that the failure to implement some occupational health recommendations for a return to work, including not allowing Mrs Whittick to visit the school in the holidays, was unwanted conduct related to disability that had the necessary effect under section 26 Equality Act 2010. The other harassment allegations were dismissed, including the February 2016 email asking for the return of keys, the January 2021 final written warning, the failure to implement a broader return-to-work plan, and the suggestion that she return in a teacher role rather than as Head of School.

The direct disability discrimination and discrimination arising from disability claims were dismissed. The tribunal held that placing Mrs Whittick on management leave in February 2016, and later suspending and investigating her after the April 2019 pub incident, were steps that could have been taken against a non-disabled teacher in comparable circumstances. On the section 15 claim, it accepted that the pub incident arose in consequence of her disability, but found the respondent was pursuing the legitimate aim of ensuring a fit and proper person remained in post and that its response was proportionate. The reasonable adjustments claim succeeded only as to two matters: the failure to provide timeframes for the disciplinary process and the failure to meet suspension review dates. No remedy was determined at liability; the judgment is a liability decision and listed a separate remedy hearing.