The Waterfront Partnership

Case Studies

Employment Case Studies

"An ex-employee is claiming unfair dismissal and race discrimination - how do I defend these claims?" 

IT Solutions Limited (ITS) was a small but expanding IT outsourcing company employing around 70 employees. Amy Sinclair was responsible for running ITS's new Human Resource function. Having only been in her position for a couple of weeks, Amy received an Employment Tribunal claim through the post from an ex-employee who had recently been dismissed by the company. The ex-employee was not only claiming unfair dismissal but was also alleging race discrimination. The tribunal claim had been drafted by a barrister and, at first glance, appeared to Amy to be quite plausible. As the allegations were potentially very serious, and included a claim personally against the Managing Director of ITS for alleged involvement in the race discrimination claim, Amy called the Waterfront Partnership immediately. She was keen to deal with the matter promptly as she noticed that the deadline for responding to the claim was approaching rapidly, and she would no doubt have to spend time working with Waterfront's specialist employment lawyer to establish ITS's account of events so that a defence could be drafted as soon as possible.

Amy wanted a swift and cost effective resolution of the tribunal claim. One of her main concerns was with regard to the potential financial costs of the claim, especially given that the compensatory award for race discrimination is unlimited. However, she was also very worried about the consequences that the claim could have for ITS when it was bidding for new work. Amy was aware that, during a typical tender process, potential clients ask for details of any tribunal awards made against the companies bidding for the work. If the ex-employee won his case then ITS's chances of winning future business could be seriously adversely affected by it having to declare this fact in e.g. a Request for Information. Further, adverse press coverage, which may result from a public employment tribunal hearing especially about race discrimination, could also adversely affect business even if the claim was eventually found to be without merit.

Waterfront's specialist employment lawyer reviewed all the documentation relating to the ex-employee's dismissal and also interviewed the relevant witnesses in order to get a full understanding of ITS's legal position. She then drafted a robust defence which strenuously denied the claim of race discrimination as well as making clear that, due to the ex-employee's own actions, and his failure to notify ITS of certain facts in relation to his employment, he had not been unfairly dismissed and that the statutory disciplinary procedure had not been breached. The defence was then lodged with the employment tribunal well in advance of the deadline, thus protecting ITS's position.

An opportunity then arose at this stage of the litigation for Waterfront to try and resolve the claim prior to a date being set for a public tribunal hearing, and legal fees accruing as the case gained momentum. Waterfront contacted ACAS (the government conciliation and arbitration service) in order to convey to the ex-employee's solicitor that ITS wanted to conclude the matter on a commercial basis whilst not conceding liability for the claims. After contacting the ex-employee's solicitor, ACAS came back to Waterfront and confirmed that ITS's defence had been considered by him and that, as a result of this, the claim had been withdrawn by his client, and the matter was now concluded. In the circumstances, ITS was able to consider the matter closed having had no tribunal award made against it and having incurred a minimal amount in legal fees. ITS's position was also protected with respect to it winning future business through the tender process, and also with the company not having suffering adverse press publicity through a public hearing of the claim.