In person For the v Respondent — 2020

The tribunal heard and dismissed the claimant's claims against Astigan Limited and Michael Carr. It also refused the claimant's applications to add Ordnance Survey as a respondent and to amend the claim so as to pursue race discrimination against Mr Carr personally. The substantive claims before the tribunal were whistleblowing detriment, automatic unfair dismissal and race discrimination.

On the whistleblowing issues, the tribunal applied s.43B ERA 1996 and the authorities it cited, including Kilraine and Chesterton Global. It found that the 20 July 2018 PowerPoint presentation, the 31 July 2018 forwarding of the CASA advice note, and the 2 August 2018 email did not disclose information tending to show that the health or safety of any individual had been, was being or was likely to be endangered. It also found that the claimant did not reasonably believe those communications were protected disclosures.

The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed on 31 July 2018 because of his behaviour and attitude, including friction with colleagues and the board, and not because of the alleged protected disclosure. It held that the dismissal decision was not materially influenced by the 20 July 2018 presentation. It further found that the decision to place the claimant on garden leave was taken because he had stepped outside the limited remit he had been given after dismissal, not because of any whistleblowing concern.

On the race claim, the tribunal applied the Equality Act burden of proof approach it cited, including s.136 Equality Act 2010, Madarassy, Nagarajan and Shamoon. It found no evidence that the respondent or its directors were motivated by the claimant's Australian citizenship or nationality, and concluded that a British or Canadian person in the same position would have been treated in the same way. All claims were dismissed and no monetary award was made.