Mr S Rahim v Associated British Ports — 2026

Mr S Rahim succeeded in his constructive unfair dismissal, unauthorised deductions from wages and breach of contract complaints against Associated British Ports. He resigned on 12 January 2024 after disciplinary proceedings, grievances and a period of sickness absence. The tribunal unanimously found three separate breaches of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence: threatening dismissal under the Other Dismissals Policy after issuing a final written warning, failing properly to address his grievance about that threat, and withholding contractual sick pay in bad faith.

The tribunal accepted Mr Hodgkin’s account that, on 5 July 2023, Mr Rahim loudly disparaged his manager and colleagues to a junior employee outside the respondent’s offices, hours after being asked not to undermine colleagues. It found that the conduct amounted to gross misconduct and that suspension and a final written warning were justified. Faults in the initial investigation did not amount to a fundamental breach, given the later opportunity to answer the allegations. However, the further letter of 28 July threatened dismissal for matters already addressed through the disciplinary process. That threat was never withdrawn, and Mr Hodgkin did not consider the working relationship beyond repair.

Each of the three breaches contributed to Mr Rahim’s resignation. He had not affirmed the contract: he remained off sick, continued to challenge his treatment and pay, and the dismissal threat persisted. The tribunal rejected the respondent’s reliance on ill-health or a breakdown in relationships to justify the dismissal. It found no evidence about his prospects of returning to work and no attempt to repair relationships through measures such as mediation or allowing the warning to take effect. Mrs Boot additionally found that continued exclusion from work and IT systems breached trust and confidence; the majority found that suspension had been lifted on 31 July 2023.

The tribunal held that the contractual power to withhold sick pay during disciplinary proceedings did not extend to an appeal or a stated intention to appeal. Alternatively, applying Braganza, the power had not been exercised in good faith, consistently with its contractual purpose or in accordance with trust and confidence. The majority found that Mr Rahim was entitled to full sick pay for 16 weeks from 31 July 2023 and half pay thereafter until his employment ended. Mrs Boot considered full pay due throughout because suspension continued. The failure to pay the sums properly due established both the wages and contract claims.

The two remaining direct race discrimination complaints failed. Mr Rahim, who is Pakistani Asian, was not in materially the same circumstances as Daniel Landi, whose part in the conversation was less serious and who had not received the earlier warning. There was no basis to find less favourable treatment than a hypothetical comparator of another race, so the burden of proof did not shift. Mr Rahim also failed to prove that the respondent portrayed him as a threat when obtaining CCTV footage from the building management company. All other race discrimination complaints were dismissed upon withdrawal.