Mr M French v Bioline Agrosciences Limited — 2019

Mr M French was employed as an assistant accountant from 2 January 2019 to 11 January 2019. The dispute arose after he asked for a lay-off and short-term working clause to be removed from a proposed contract of employment. The Respondent refused, and the Claimant said he was then verbally dismissed, that no disciplinary process was followed, and that his grievance was not investigated. The Respondent accepted that there had been a disagreement about the clause, that the Claimant was dismissed without a disciplinary procedure, and that he had tried to raise a grievance. It said the written contract had not been signed and therefore had not been breached.

The Tribunal struck out the breach of contract claim because the contract relied on had not been concluded. It found that the parties had not reached agreement on the disputed term by the date of dismissal and the written contract was unsigned, so the claim had no reasonable prospects of success.

The sex discrimination complaints were also struck out under Rule 37. The Tribunal held that Rebecca, the Claimant's manager, was not a valid comparator under section 23 of the Equality Act 2010 because her circumstances were materially different: she was not the Claimant, had not refused a contract term, had not been dismissed, and had not raised a grievance. Applying Madarassy, the Tribunal said the facts relied on showed no more than a difference in treatment and a difference in protected characteristic, which indicated only a possibility of discrimination. It also rejected the submission that the Claimant's belief that he had been discriminated against was enough, and said that even a hypothetical female comparator would not give the claim reasonable prospects of success.