Case 1400336/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Bailey v Avon Fire & Rescue Service — 2025
- Case reference
- 1400336/2024
- Decision date
- 23 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Woodhead
- Venue
- in person from the Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Bailey
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant was employed by Avon Fire & Rescue Service from 14 October 1996 until his resignation with immediate effect on 9 September 2023. He brought complaints of disability discrimination and constructive unfair dismissal, but the disability discrimination complaints were dismissed on withdrawal before the final hearing.
The remaining issue was whether the Respondent had acted in breach of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence, including in relation to the investigation, disciplinary process, sanctions, role move, occupational health recommendation, and refusal to change sanctions. The Tribunal found that neither the individual matters nor their cumulative effect amounted to conduct without reasonable and proper cause or conduct calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage the relationship of trust and confidence.
The Tribunal concluded that the Claimant was not constructively dismissed and was not unfairly dismissed. The constructive unfair dismissal complaint was therefore dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment states that the complaint of constructive unfair dismissal was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the complaints of disability discrimination were dismissed on withdrawal before the final hearing. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- implied term of mutual trust and confidence
- s.98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996
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.