Mr P Frankland v Nexia Scientific Limited — 2021

The tribunal found that Mr Frankland, a Senior Maintenance Technician, was dismissed on 22 August 2019 after a meeting about alleged time-sheet fraud, aggressive behaviour and refusal to accept a replacement vehicle. Although it accepted conduct was the reason advanced by Nexia Scientific Limited, it preferred the claimant's evidence on the crucial issues and found there was no genuine belief on reasonable grounds, no reasonable investigation, and no fair hearing. It found he had been "ambushed" at the 19 June 2019 meeting at Mr Dexter and Ms Wang's home, was not told of the allegations in advance, and was denied any meaningful appeal process.

The unfair dismissal claim therefore succeeded. The tribunal found no contributory conduct of significance and rejected a Polkey reduction, saying that a fair process would not have led to dismissal. It awarded a basic award of £5,512.50 and a compensatory award of £33,298.00, and on the separate breach of contract claim it held that the respondent was not entitled to dismiss without notice because no fundamental breach by the claimant was proved. Seven weeks' notice pay of £3,526.18 was awarded.

The age discrimination claims failed. The tribunal held that all complaints other than the dismissal were out of time and refused to extend time, noting that the claimant had not complained at the time and was represented by his HR-professional daughter. It found the dismissal itself was not because of age and rejected the alleged training, equipment, email, junior-engineer and vehicle-related treatment. The harassment claim also failed because the tribunal was not satisfied that the comments or vehicle change amounted to unwanted conduct related to age creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. The automatic unfair dismissal under section 103A ERA, the whistleblowing detriment claim under section 47B ERA, and the unlawful deduction of wages claim were withdrawn and dismissed.