Dr C Fanutti v University of East Anglia — 2017

This was a reconsideration of the tribunal's earlier merits judgment. The claimant sought to revisit out-of-time complaints and the finding on the reason for dismissal. The tribunal refused reconsideration of the out-of-time point and limited the rehearing to whether the dismissal had been discriminatory, stressing the limited scope of reconsideration and the need for finality.

On the substance, the tribunal reaffirmed that the dismissal was not discriminatory. It found that Professor Ward's preferment of charges was driven by concerns about the claimant's conduct, including his view that her complaints were false and that she was seeking to pressure managers over what work she would do. The tribunal found Professor Ward to be a reliable witness and accepted that his reasons were not influenced by any discriminatory motive.

The tribunal also found that Professor Warnock's committee exercised independent judgment, heard evidence from witnesses to the events in question, and reached its own findings. The Vice-Chancellor then dismissed the claimant on the basis of that committee's report and recommendation. The tribunal said the true reason for dismissal was a genuine belief that the claimant had breached certain University statutes.

The tribunal separately rejected the victimisation allegation. It found that Professor Ward was not influenced by the fact that the claimant's complaints included discrimination, and it found no basis for saying that the earlier tribunal claims were the reason for the dismissal. It therefore confirmed its earlier conclusion that the dismissal was unfair but not discriminatory. The reconsideration judgment records no remedy figure.