Mr. E. Kemp, counsel For the v Respondent — 2017

Mr Holland, a senior officer with Buckinghamshire and Milton Keynes Fire Authority, was dismissed after being convicted of drink-driving following events on 5 and 6 May 2017. The tribunal found that he had developed depression and PTSD after the Fishermead fire incident in 2010, and it accepted that his act of getting into his car and driving while intoxicated arose in consequence of that disability.

On unfair dismissal, the tribunal held that the reason for dismissal at the appeal stage was some other substantial reason: reputational damage and future reputational risk arising from a senior fire officer's conviction. It found that the respondent genuinely believed the relevant facts, that the reason was capable of justifying dismissal, and that the dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses. It also found that the respondent had properly considered mitigation, including the claimant's service history and mental health evidence.

On disability discrimination, the tribunal accepted that the claimant had a disability and that section 15 was engaged, but it held that dismissal pursued the legitimate aim of maintaining public confidence in the fire service and was proportionate. The tribunal also rejected the reasonable adjustments complaint, holding that the claimant was not placed at a substantial disadvantage in recounting his story and that the adjustments sought would not have avoided any disadvantage.

The victimisation complaint also failed. The tribunal accepted the appeal letter amounted to a protected act, but found that Mr Thelwell wrote to the magistrates' court because he considered it his ethical duty to correct a matter he believed had been mis-stated, and that the press statement was drafted and approved because it was viewed as factual, fair, accurate and confidential. All claims were dismissed and no remedy was awarded.