Kayvyn Dollin v Celeris Partners — 2022

The tribunal struck out the claims for blackmail and for a rebate of a personal tax allowance because it had no jurisdiction over those matters. It also recorded that the claims for unpaid wages and holiday pay would proceed to a full hearing, so they were not finally determined in this judgment.

On the harassment issue, the tribunal said the claimant had not ticked discrimination on the claim form and, after discussion, had not intended to make a discrimination claim because he could not identify a protected characteristic or facts showing a claim linked to one. It held that the word "harassment" was being used in a colloquial sense rather than a legal one, that the complaint about the theft allegation on 17 January 2021 was not linked to a protected characteristic, and that similar allegations had been made against other employees at other times.

For the claim described as harassment and wrongful false accusations, the tribunal said harassment in the legal sense was not pleaded and was not included as a head of claim on the form; if it was sufficiently pleaded, it would in any event be struck out. The pension contributions claim was dismissed because the claimant withdrew it after the respondent had paid the outstanding sums. The tribunal also noted, for completeness, that although box 10.1 had been ticked, there was no suggestion of whistleblowing.