Mr Mark Robins v Surrey & Borders NHS Foundation Trust Sitting At: London South (by CVP) — 2025

The tribunal found that the respondent dismissed the claimant because it considered he had breached policies and procedures and submitted falsified financial claims. It rejected the claimant's contention that the real reason was a grudge arising from a 2021 grievance, found that misconduct was a potentially fair reason, and held that the decision makers had a genuine belief based on reasonable grounds after a reasonable investigation and fair procedure.

For the reasonable adjustments claim, the tribunal found that the claimant had anxiety and depression amounting to disability, and that the respondent knew or ought reasonably to have known of it. However, it held that the relied-on disciplinary policy provisions either did not put him at a substantial disadvantage, did not apply as contended, or did not require the proposed adjustment; it also found that not requiring him to work during the investigation was not sufficiently connected to the pleaded PCPs and that allowing him to continue working was reasonable.

On breach of contract, the tribunal considered the alleged failures to follow several policies. Although it found some policy provisions had not been followed, including expense-claim checks and the number of interview panel members for a band 7 role, it concluded the policies were not incorporated into the contract and therefore any failure to follow them did not amount to breach of contract.