Mr Mukhtiar Singh - Counsel For the v Mr Richard Wayman - Counsel — 2018

The claim was brought only under the Equality Act 2010 and only on the protected characteristic of religion. The tribunal held that the 23 May 2017 office remarks after the Manchester Arena bombing, including the terrorist reference and questions such as where the claimant had been, were unwanted conduct related to religion and created an offensive environment, so the harassment claim succeeded for that incident. It rejected direct discrimination in relation to that event, and it found that the claimant's earlier forecourt comment to Mr Fennessy was not a protected act because he only said words to the effect that they were talking about Manchester.

The tribunal rejected the remaining discrimination, harassment and victimisation complaints arising from the build-up, incident 2, the CCTV handling, the disciplinary process, the grievance process, sick pay, annual leave and return-to-work questions. It found that the respondent had preserved the relevant CCTV, investigated the four main participants, and imposed disciplinary action on the basis of the evidence. It also held that the claimant's 12:56 email and later WhatsApp messages on 23 May 2017 did amount to protected acts, but his earlier forecourt conversation did not, and it found no evidence of a wider Islamophobic culture or a conspiracy to manage him out.

Victimisation was upheld only in relation to the PHI application process. In January 2018 Ms Craigs completed the discretionary comments section on the PHI form with statements including that she strongly believed Bobby was after financial gain, that he had raised a discrimination tribunal claim, and that the claim was ingenuine. The tribunal found those comments gratuitous, incomplete and misleading, and held that the claimant's history of complaints, including complaints of discrimination, was a material factor. This judgment was on liability only; remedy was left to a separate hearing.