In person v Evonik Chemicals Limited — 2022

The tribunal unanimously found that Mr J English was subjected to detriments contrary to s146 TULCRA in relation to the listed matters taken from the agreed issues. Those upheld matters were asking him to attend a meeting on 5 March 2020 and threatening disciplinary action and dismissal, inviting him to a Safety at Evonik disciplinary meeting before the investigation was completed, moving him to the warehouse department after the Ancamine K54 disciplinary outcome, approaching him for Safety at Evonik meeting minutes and treating him differently from Mr Chris Beech, and removing him from the respondent’s site on 3 July 2020. The tribunal held that these acts formed part of a series of similar acts, so it had jurisdiction over all of them.

The tribunal rejected the claimant’s other unlawful detriment claims, which were dismissed. It also found that he was constructively dismissed in accordance with s95 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. On that basis, his claim of unfair dismissal contrary to s94 ERA 1996 was upheld, and his claim of automatic unfair dismissal under s152 TULCRA was also upheld.

The tribunal recorded that the claimant contributed to his dismissal through his conduct and that his compensation may be reduced by up to 10% to reflect that contribution. Whether any reduction was just and equitable, and the amount of compensation, were left to a later remedy hearing. No final monetary award was recorded in this judgment.