Case 3305151/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Bowen, Counsel For the v Respondent — 2017
- Case reference
- 3305151/2018
- Decision date
- 21 November 2017
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Lewis Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Ms S Bowen, Counsel For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr J Strohm was a long-serving Lead Quality Specialist at NHS Blood & Transplant. The dispute began with A’s email of 4 January 2017 alleging harassment. The tribunal accepted that there was no evidence whatsoever of sexualised language or conduct, and approached the matter as a workplace conflict-management dispute involving the claimant, A and B. It found that the respondent’s objective was to contain the conflict and keep the parties working, although it could have communicated more clearly in writing.
After an informal meeting with Ms Murphy on 10 January 2017 and a period of apparent calm, further complaints led to a fact-finding process by Ms Ranson and Ms Kwenda in June to September 2017. Mr Rackham and Ms Elder decided not to take the matter to a disciplinary hearing, but instead to separate the claimant from A and B and to restrict his routine attendance at Colindale unless notified and approved. The tribunal held that Colindale remained the claimant’s contractual base, but his access to it was temporarily restricted for reasonable and proper cause. It rejected his case that he had been required to work from home, unfairly excluded from his workplace, or subjected to conduct that breached the Dignity at Work or grievance procedures in a repudiatory way.
The claimant pursued a grievance in October 2017, was instructed on 13 October not to work from Colindale pending resolution, and resigned the day after the grievance outcome letter of 7 December 2017. Applying s.95(1)(c) ERA 1996, Western Excavating, Malik and the last-straw approach in Kaur, Employment Judge R Lewis held that the respondent’s conduct was not without reasonable or proper cause and was not calculated or likely to destroy trust and confidence. The tribunal found that the immediate trigger for resignation was the grievance failure and the claimant’s perception that he would remain excluded from Colindale, but that this did not amount to constructive dismissal. The claim was dismissed and no remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment analysed the case as a constructive dismissal claim under s.95(1)(c) ERA 1996 and said the unfair dismissal claim failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- s.95(1)(c) ERA 1996
- Western Excavating ECC Limited v Sharp
- Malik v BCCI
- Kaur v Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.