Case 2300574/2019 · Employment Tribunal

In Person Interpreter: Mr R Konop (Polish/English) For the v Mr T Fuller, Consultant — 2019

Case reference: 2300574/2019
Decision date: 21 September 2019
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Siddall
Panel members: Mrs C Wickersham, Ms M Foster-Norman

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

In Person Interpreter: Mr R Konop (Polish/English) For the

Respondent

Mr T Fuller, Consultant

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Mr Jezioranski worked for the respondent from late May 2013 until his summary dismissal on 1 February 2019 in a role described as cleaner/estate operative/estate caretaker at Kidbrooke Village. The dispute that led to the dismissal began with a 25 July 2018 disagreement about a wall planner and an email the claimant sent later that day raising health and safety concerns. He later posted a series of comments on the respondent's Life Works intranet platform overnight on 31 July and 1 August 2018, after which the respondent suspended him and pursued disciplinary proceedings. The tribunal also dealt with claims for redundancy pay, holiday pay, unpaid wages, notice pay, travel expenses, whistleblowing detriment, race discrimination and indirect religious discrimination.

Claims and outcomes

10 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Redundancy	The claimant confirmed that he had withdrawn the redundancy payment claim; the tribunal recorded it as dismissed on withdrawal.	Withdrawn	—	—
Holiday pay	The claimant withdrew the holiday pay claim during the hearing; the tribunal recorded it as dismissed on withdrawal.	Withdrawn	—	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	The claimant alleged unpaid wages for 29, 30 and 31 January and 1 February 2019. The tribunal found the payslips showed he had been paid for the whole month and dismissed the claim.	Dismissed	—	—
Unfair dismissal	Ordinary unfair dismissal complaint under section 98(4) ERA 1996. The tribunal held the respondent genuinely believed the claimant had posted misconduct on the Life Works platform, had reasonable grounds for that belief, and dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses.	Dismissed	—	—
Whistleblowing	Protected disclosure detriment complaints under sections 47B and 48 ERA 1996. The tribunal found that some health and safety concerns could amount to qualifying disclosures, but it rejected the alleged detriments, including grievance handling, refusal of a meeting with a director, and additional work/responsibilities.	Dismissed	—	—
Whistleblowing	Automatic unfair dismissal complaint under section 103A ERA 1996. The tribunal found the dismissal was caused by the Life Works misconduct and not by any protected disclosure.

Legal tests applied

13 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.