Case 4105216/2018 · Employment Tribunal
A Kemp Members: Mrs Z van Zwanenberg Mr S Cardownie Mr E Jarvie v Consortio Security Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 4105216/2018
- Decision date
- 22 March 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mr
- Venue
- Edinburgh
- Panel members
- Mrs Z van Zwanenberg, Mr S Cardownie
Parties
2 namedClaimant
A Kemp Members: Mrs Z van Zwanenberg Mr S Cardownie Mr E Jarvie
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dismissed Mr Eric Jarvie's automatic unfair dismissal claim under section 100 ERA 1996. It accepted Mr Stone's evidence that the sole reason for the dismissal on 3 April 2018 was the Respondent's belief that Mr Jarvie had failed to wear required PPE on site. The Claimant said he had been dismissed for raising health and safety concerns, but the tribunal found that the emails he sent referred to safety matters only in general terms and were not the reason for dismissal.
The tribunal rejected the alternative explanation advanced by the Claimant in evidence that third-party pressure from Laing O'Rourke Services Ltd caused the dismissal. It found that this was inconsistent with the pleaded case and that the Respondent had not been aware of the later emails from LOR when it decided to dismiss. The tribunal also held that there was no evidence that Mr Jarvie left work or refused to return in circumstances of serious and imminent danger, so the statutory tests in section 100 were not met.
The separate complaint about failure to provide terms and conditions under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 also failed. The tribunal found that a written statement of terms had been sent at the start of employment and that Mr Jarvie accepted in cross-examination that he had received it. The tribunal therefore dismissed the claim in full and made no award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Automatic unfair dismissal claim under section 100 ERA 1996. The tribunal found the sole reason for dismissal was the Respondent's belief that the Claimant had failed to wear required PPE on site, not that he had raised health and safety concerns. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Complaint under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 concerning failure to provide terms and conditions of employment. The tribunal found that a written statement had been sent at the start of employment and that the Claimant accepted receiving it. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- section 100 ERA 1996
- section 1 ERA 1996
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
- section 30 Employment Act 2002
- ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures
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.