Case 4100407/2021 · Employment Tribunal
: L Grime and J McCaig Mr J Kelly v Represented by: Ms P Abladey Barrister Prestonfield Golf Club — 2021
- Case reference
- 4100407/2021
- Decision date
- 29 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Strain Members
- Venue
- person in Edinburgh
- Panel members
- L Grime, J McCaig
Parties
2 namedClaimant
: L Grime and J McCaig Mr J Kelly
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant worked for Prestonfield Golf Club as a greenkeeper from 15 August 2008 until 22 September 2020. The tribunal accepted the evidence of the claimant, Mr MacKenzie, Mr Scott and Mr Deavy as credible and reliable, and preferred it to Mr Cowan's evidence on disputed matters. It found Mr Cowan's conduct at the 25 March 2020 furlough meeting was threatening, and accepted that during 8 to 10 June 2020 he dismissed concerns about broken-into lockers, swore at the claimant on the course, threatened to send him home without pay if he would not wash down machinery, and insisted on receipts before the claimant could remove his own tools.
On the constructive dismissal issue, the tribunal held that the conduct of the respondent, through Mr Cowan, taken cumulatively, amounted to a significant breach going to the root of the contract and a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. It found the claimant had not affirmed the contract and that his resignation on 22 September 2020 was the last straw after he discovered he would still be reporting to Mr Cowan rather than Mr MacKenzie. It therefore held that he had been constructively and unfairly dismissed.
The tribunal dismissed the automatic unfair dismissal claim under s.103A ERA 1996 because it was not satisfied that the dismissal was principally because of protected disclosures. It upheld a detriment claim under s.47B ERA 1996 only for the 9 June 2020 threat to send the claimant home without pay if he refused to wash down the machine, finding that his statement that the task was illegal was a qualifying protected disclosure made in the public interest. For remedy, the tribunal awarded a basic award of £6,317.02, £500 for loss of statutory rights, and £7,000 for injury to feelings in the lower Vento band. It made no award for pension loss, found there was no ongoing loss since resignation, and said the recoupment regulations did not apply.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Constructive and unfair dismissal upheld. The tribunal held that the respondent's conduct, particularly through Mr Cowan, breached the implied term of trust and confidence and that the claimant resigned on 22 September 2020 as a result. | Upheld | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Automatic unfair dismissal under s.103A ERA 1996 was dismissed. The tribunal found the claimant was not dismissed because he had made protected disclosures. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Detriment under s.47B ERA 1996 was upheld only in relation to Mr Cowan's 9 June 2020 threat to send the claimant home without pay if he refused to wash down the machine. The tribunal found the claimant's statement that the wash-down was illegal and environmentally harmful was a qualifying protected disclosure made in the public interest. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £13,817
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £6,317
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £500
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
15 references- Western Excavating (ECC) Ltd v Sharp
- Malik and Mahmud v Bank of Credit and Commerce International S.A.
- s.98(4) ERA 1996
- s.103A ERA 1996
- s.47B ERA 1996
- Cavendish Munro Professional Risks Management Ltd v Geduld
- Kilraine v London Borough of Wandsworth
- Darnton v University of Surrey
- Korashi v Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Local Health Board
- Phoenix House Ltd v Stockman
- Chesterton Global Ltd (t/a Chestertons) v Nurmohamed
- Kuzel v Roche Products Ltd
- Smith v Hayle Town Council
- Vento v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police
- Simmons v Castle
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.