- MR C MURRAY (COUNSEL) FOR THE v Respondent — 2021

The claimant was employed by the respondent as an apprentice toolmaker from 20 September 2019 on a fixed-term apprenticeship agreement. He was dismissed on 18 February 2020. At the case management stage, earlier age discrimination and breach of contract claims about notice pay had been withdrawn, leaving claims of direct sex and/or sexual orientation discrimination, harassment related to sex and/or sexual orientation, and victimisation for determination.

The claimant alleged a series of homophobic comments and related conduct, including comments at the Christmas party and in January 2020, pressure to disclose his sexual orientation, repeated references to him as gay or a virgin, drawings of penises in his work area and on overalls, pornographic images, and comments about anal sex. He also alleged that he had been victimised by unreasonable scrutiny of his work in the period leading up to dismissal. The respondent denied those allegations and said the dismissal was because he had fallen behind in his apprenticeship, had 0% coursework progress, and was not producing work to an acceptable standard despite significant support.

The tribunal found the case turned on a stark conflict of evidence and accepted the respondent's account on the balance of probabilities. It noted the absence of any contemporaneous complaint by the claimant, contemporaneous documentation supporting the respondent's concerns about coursework and work performance, the consistency of Kristian Williams' evidence with the respondent's account, and the consistency of the responses given by staff when interviewed on 30 July 2020. The tribunal also considered that the specific reference to "nugget porn" in the respondent's Christmas party evidence was unlikely to have been invented.

On that basis, the tribunal concluded that the claimant had not proved the alleged discriminatory or harassing conduct, had not proved that his dismissal was discriminatory, and had not proved victimisation. It held that the dismissal followed the respondent's concerns about his progress and performance, and dismissed all of the live claims. No remedy was awarded.