Case 3314128/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Dumbrill v Hexcel Composites Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 3314128/2019
- Decision date
- 29 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cassel Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Dumbrill
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr B Dumbrill was employed by Hexcel Composites Limited from 1 April 2016 until his dismissal on 20 February 2019. The dismissal arose from an incident on 14 November 2018 during a night shift at the Duxford site, when Kevin Angus alleged that the claimant had used racially abusive language. The claimant denied that allegation and said he had used the word "Winger". An investigation was carried out by Mr James Williams, a disciplinary hearing was chaired by Mr Steve Mortimer, and an appeal was heard by Mr Mark Blance.
The tribunal held that the reason for dismissal was conduct and that there was no other sensible explanation on the evidence. It applied the Burchell test and s.98(4) ERA 1996, and also referred to the Acas Code of Practice. It found that the investigation was adequate, that the claimant had been informed of the allegations and of the possibility of summary dismissal, that he had been given the right to be accompanied, and that the absence of earlier disclosure of some further interview material did not affect the outcome and was considered on appeal.
The tribunal concluded that any minor procedural defects were cured on appeal and that the process overall was fair. It found that Mr Mortimer and Mr Blance both took conscientious and thorough approaches, and that summary dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses in the circumstances. The claim for unfair dismissal therefore failed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the dismissal was for conduct, that the investigation, disciplinary hearing and appeal were fair, and that dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Burchell test
- s.98(4) ERA 1996
- reasonable responses test
- Acas Code of Practice
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.