Mr N Davidson v Pharma-Z Limited — 2019

Mr Davidson, who was aged 19 and gay at the material time, worked as a Dispenser/Healthcare Assistant at the respondent's Mundesley branch. After Bethany Whitaker complained on 30 October 2017 that she had been bullied by Mr Davidson and Lorraine Cheney, Emma Murray investigated, took statements from staff including Ms Whitaker, Ms Furr, Ms Kirby, Ms King and Mr Wyatt, and concluded that Mr Davidson and Ms Cheney had engaged in bullying behaviour over a period of time. Following a disciplinary hearing chaired by Deirdre Whyatt, Mr Davidson was dismissed for gross misconduct by letter dated 6 December 2017. The tribunal recorded that the allegation of not carrying out a reasonable request was not upheld, but the bullying and inappropriate conduct allegations were upheld.

On the unfair dismissal claim, the tribunal held that the reason for dismissal was conduct and that Ms Whyatt genuinely believed Mr Davidson had bullied Ms Whitaker over a period of about a year. It found that belief was supported by reasonable grounds, including Ms Whitaker's complaints, corroboration from other witnesses, and Mr Davidson's own accounts, which the tribunal considered contained contradictions and inconsistencies. The tribunal accepted Ms Whyatt's conclusions about the box incident, the flea incident, the drive-by incident and Mr Davidson's challenge to Ms Kirby about whether her illness was genuine. It held that the investigation was reasonable, that Ms Murray was a suitable investigator, that the failure to interview Mr Gilby did not render the process unfair, and that the delay in Ms Whitaker reporting matters did not make dismissal outside the range of reasonable responses.

The tribunal also rejected the discrimination claims based on age, sex and sexual orientation. It treated the grievance and appeal issues as including the TC mug complaint, the alleged comments by Ms Furr, the grievance appeal and the decision on Mr Davidson's appeal against dismissal. It found no facts from which it could infer that Mr Standerwick's refusal to uphold Mr Davidson's appeal, Mr Dicks's grievance outcome, Ms Whyatt's dismissal decision, or Ms Murray's handling of the grievance appeal were because of age, sex or sexual orientation. The tribunal accepted that Ms Cheney was treated differently because of the way the two appeals were presented and because Mr Davidson was found to be the driver, instigator, and more confrontational party, not because of a protected characteristic. It found the TC mug was inappropriate but not discriminatory or harassing, and concluded that the allegedly offensive language attributed to Ms Furr was not shown to be directed at Mr Davidson because of age, sex or sexual orientation. All claims were therefore dismissed and no award was made.