Mr Y Mahmood v Keolis Amey Docklands Limited — 2021

Mr Mahmood had worked for Keolis Amey Docklands for eight years. He was away from work from 19 June 2019 to 19 October 2019 with stress, and the tribunal accepted that the illness had a substantial effect on his day-to-day activities. It found, however, that the condition had not lasted, and was not expected to last, 12 months, so he was not disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010. The disability discrimination complaints were therefore dismissed. The tribunal added that, even if he had been disabled, there was no reason to think Mr Bourne or Mr Layton were motivated by his sickness absence.

The unfair dismissal claim succeeded. The tribunal accepted that the respondent genuinely believed Mr Mahmood had committed misconduct after a proper investigation, and it considered the procedure fair. It nonetheless held that dismissal was outside the range of reasonable responses, taking into account his eight years' service, one prior warning, the absence of suspension, the fact that he worked for about three months after the incident without further issue, and the failure properly to consider a lesser sanction. The tribunal found that Mr Mahmood contributed to his dismissal by 50% and refused reinstatement or re-engagement.

In remedy, the tribunal awarded a basic award of £2,100 and a compensatory award of £26,757.91 for unfair dismissal after the 50% contribution deduction. It also awarded £5,345.68 as damages for wrongful dismissal, reflecting 8 weeks' notice pay. The holiday pay claim was dismissed because the tribunal found that the sums had already been paid in the final salary and that the new basis suggested in cross-examination would have required an amendment that was not sought. The final grossed-up total awarded was £37,005.98, and the recoupment regulations applied with a prescribed element of £18,409.19 and a balance of £18,596.80.