Mr G Airey v Ronald Fletcher Baker LLP — 2025

The claimant, a solicitor and salaried partner who had been head of employment at the respondent firm, resigned on 27 November 2022 with effect from 28 February 2023 and brought a constructive unfair dismissal claim based on twelve factual allegations said to amount, individually and cumulatively, to a fundamental breach of contract. He also pursued a health and safety detriment claim under s.44(1)(d) Employment Rights Act 1996 arising from an NHS test-and-trace 'ping' in August 2021, following which he did not attend work despite a negative COVID-19 test.

The tribunal, sitting as Employment Judge Forde with Ms L Jones and Mr S Williams, heard liability only over five days in January and February 2025. It found the claimant to be an inconsistent witness and considered that he had engaged in 'reverse engineering' by relying heavily on private emails between Ms Rahim and other Equity Partners obtained through a subject access request. The tribunal rejected the characterisation of Ms Rahim's conduct as bullying and found that the internal communications were appropriate exchanges among senior managers of an LLP about a department of concern. On each of the twelve allegations, the tribunal found no breach of the implied term of trust and confidence and concluded that by mid-October 2022 the claimant had set himself on a predetermined course.

On the s.44(1)(d) claim, applying Herve and Rodgers v Leeds Laser Cutting Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 1659, the tribunal held that the statutory protection requires a serious and imminent danger arising at the workplace which the employee cannot reasonably be expected to avert; here the claimant was not asked to attend, had tested negative, and on his own case represented the potential risk rather than encountering one at work. The conditions of s.44(1)(d) were not made out and, in the alternative, no detriment had been evidenced. Both complaints were dismissed.