Mr Kamour Raji v West Ham United Football Club Limited — 2020

Mr Raji was employed as a security guard at West Ham United's Rush Green training ground. The tribunal found that, after a complaint that kit had gone missing from a skip, he admitted in the investigation meeting that he had taken West Ham goods from the skip without permission, arranged for a cab to collect them, and later admitted at the disciplinary hearing that he had done the acts alleged and that they were misconduct. He also admitted leaving the site for more than 30 minutes to get food during Ramadan, leaving his colleague alone. On those facts, Employment Judge Ross and the lay members found that Ben Illingworth genuinely believed the claimant was guilty of gross misconduct, had reasonable grounds for that belief, and carried out a reasonable investigation within the meaning of Burchell and s.98(4) ERA 1996.

The tribunal therefore dismissed the unfair dismissal complaint. It also dismissed the direct race discrimination and direct religion or belief discrimination complaints. It found that the sole reason for dismissal was misconduct, that race and religion played no part in the decision, and that there was no less favourable treatment compared with the named comparators Hafiz Ali, Ahmed and Sunny or a hypothetical comparator. The appeal process was also found fair: Ms Cartwright upheld the dismissal after further enquiries by Michelle Gull, and the tribunal accepted that the appeal was more in the nature of a rehearing than a review.

The indirect religion complaint failed because the tribunal identified the relevant PCP as the requirement that security staff not leave the Rush Green site during a shift without permission or sufficient cause. It held that this PCP pursued the legitimate aim of keeping staff, premises and property safe, and that it was proportionate. The tribunal found the claimant could have brought food with him, ordered food for delivery, or asked permission to leave, and it did not accept that Muslim staff, or the claimant in particular, were put at a relevant disadvantage on the evidence. The indirect race complaint had been withdrawn and was formally dismissed on withdrawal. All complaints failed and no remedy was awarded.