Mr Z Akbar v Bestway Wholesale Limited — 2023

The tribunal found that Mr Akbar had not made the protected disclosure pleaded in his claim. He relied on an alleged January or February 2019 email to John Humphreys and Ashar Rehman about flaws in the respondent's online accounts system and possible fraud, but the tribunal found no such email was before it and that the claimant had not given witness statement evidence of that disclosure. The protected disclosure detriment claim and the automatic unfair dismissal claim under section 103A ERA 1996 were dismissed.

On disability, the respondent conceded disability by reason of depression from September 2019, so the tribunal considered only February to September 2019. It found that the evidence did not show that the claimant had a mental impairment of depression with a long-term substantial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities during that earlier period. It did not accept that the claimant had attempted suicide in May 2019 or that he had made the respondent aware of such an event at that time.

For ordinary unfair dismissal, the tribunal found that the respondent investigated serious allegations about fraudulent credit notes after Mr Shah Nawaz implicated the claimant and after documents, user-access records, CCTV enquiries and other statements were gathered. It found that Mr Ahmed honestly believed the claimant was responsible for gross misconduct, that there were reasonable grounds for that belief, that the investigation and procedure were reasonable, and that dismissal and rejection of the appeal were within the band of reasonable responses. The ordinary unfair dismissal claim was dismissed.

The disability discrimination claims were dismissed. The tribunal found that sick pay had not been stopped from October 2019 but reduced to statutory sick pay, that company sick pay was discretionary, and that the claimant had not proved facts from which disability discrimination could be inferred. It found that the investigation, disciplinary process and dismissal were because of the misconduct allegations and the decision-maker's belief in gross misconduct, not because of disability or disability-related absence. The reasonable adjustments claim failed because the first two matters pre-dated the period in which disability was established and because the pleaded matters were found not to be PCPs.

The harassment related to disability claim was dismissed because the tribunal found that the alleged October 2019 email reporting an attempted suicide did not exist, that Ms Dowool had not said 'anxiety, depression or whatever', and that the termination letter being sent to an old address was a human error arising from two HR profiles and was not related to disability. The unauthorised deduction from wages claim failed because the claimant had no contractual right to full pay during suspension while absent sick. The holiday pay claim failed because the claimant produced no evidence of outstanding holiday, had taken 21 days' leave and two bank holidays in May-June, and had received £2,199 gross holiday pay in his final payslip.