Mr H Lawrenson v The Car Group Ltd — 2023

The tribunal found that Mr H Lawrenson made two public interest disclosures in June 2021: one to Mr Holroyd about RAC standards, and one to Ms Dippenar about the building being open while a water meter was fitted. It found that the other disclosures relied upon were not public interest disclosures.

The claimant's automatically unfair dismissal claim under s.103A ERA 1996 failed because the tribunal found that the principal reason for dismissal was not that he had made either or both of the protected disclosures. For the same reason, the detriment claim under s.47B ERA 1996 failed: the tribunal found that he was not subjected to a detriment on the ground that he had made either or both of the disclosures.

The tribunal also rejected the direct discrimination claims. It found that the claimant was not treated unfavourably because of race and was not treated unfavourably because of sexual orientation, so both claims under s.13 Equality Act 2010 were dismissed. It further held that, when proceedings began, the respondent was not in breach of its obligation under ss.1 and 4 ERA 1996 to provide a written statement of employment particulars or particulars of change.

One claim succeeded. The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages by failing to pay the claimant in June or July 2021 for overtime worked throughout his employment, after Aleem had committed the respondent to pay it in a June 2021 conversation. The tribunal ordered payment of £485.10. The written record also included the standard interest notice, stating a relevant decision day of 24 April 2023 and a stipulated interest rate of 8% per annum.