Member R Duguid Tribunal Member M MacFarlane Dr R Akintayo v Fife Health Board — 2026

The tribunal unanimously dismissed Dr R Akintayo's direct race discrimination and race-related harassment claims against Fife Health Board and Dr J McLaren. Dr Akintayo, a black Nigerian consultant rheumatologist, began a temporary locum appointment on 24 March 2025. His initial contract was extended to 30 June 2025, but an offer of a further extension was later withdrawn. His employment ended on 30 June.

The tribunal rejected the claimant's evidence that Dr McLaren had refused to shake his hand, appeared surprised that he was black and asked whether his name was Japanese. It found that these alleged incidents would have appeared in the claimant's contemporaneous accounts had they occurred. It accepted that Dr McLaren knew the claimant was black and Nigerian before encouraging his recruitment, and accepted Dr Ahmad's evidence about the reasons for withdrawing the further contract extension.

The leave complaints concerned an email on 2 April directing appointments staff to block clinics on three dates later that month. The claimant had not sought approval, and the email neither gave a reason nor described an emergency. The board required six weeks' notice except in exceptional circumstances. The tribunal found that asking the waiting times co-ordinator to explain the policy and the difficulties with cover was not a detriment or less favourable treatment. The response was unrelated to race and did not amount to harassment. Dr McLaren subsequently reorganised duties so the claimant could take the leave.

The rota complaints concerned Dr McLaren's decision on 3 April to release Dr Petridis from duty cover to write urgent prescriptions for patients awaiting infusions. The claimant consequently became first on-call. The tribunal found that this was within the clinical duties and flexibility expected of his higher-paid locum role. It accepted that the change served patient care and would have been made irrespective of the doctors' race. There was no detriment or less favourable treatment, and the claimant's perception that the change undermined him was not reasonable for the harassment claim.

On 15 April, Dr McLaren mistakenly attributed missing patient details on a prescription copy to the claimant when Dr Ahmad had signed it. The tribunal accepted that being wrongly told he had made an error could amount to less favourable treatment and was unwanted conduct. However, it found that Dr McLaren had made a genuine mistake, having assumed the newest team member was responsible, and had apologised in person when corrected. The mistake was unrelated to race. The tribunal also found it unreasonable to regard the incident as harassment, particularly following the apology.

Withdrawal of the further contract extension was a detriment, but the tribunal found that Dr Ahmad made that decision independently and without pressure from Dr McLaren. Dr Ahmad held the claimant's professional ability in high regard but considered that tensions with Dr McLaren and difficulties involving nursing staff could affect the unit's work. He decided that the return of former locum Dr Wasir would better serve staff and patient care. The tribunal accepted that explanation and found that Dr Ahmad would have made the same decision about a locum who was not black in the same circumstances. The claimant first alleged race discrimination on 30 June, after the withdrawal decision.