Head teacher awarded £696k after constructive dismissal over Grindr contacts
A primary school head teacher was constructively unfairly dismissed and directly discriminated against because of his sexual orientation after consensual contact with two 17-year-olds via Grindr. The tribunal awarded £696,255.65.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #sexual-orientation-discrimination
- #constructive-dismissal
- #flawed-investigation
- #polkey-deduction
- #head-teacher
- #private-life
Key facts
- The claimant, a gay head teacher, had consensual sexual activity with two 17-year-old males he met via Grindr.
- A PASM meeting recommended disciplinary action but found no child protection or criminal issues.
- The investigation report by Mr Gordon was biased, contained subjective opinions, and omitted exculpatory evidence.
- The disciplinary panel lacked experience and relied heavily on LEA officers, abdicating their decision-making role.
- The claimant resigned after the appeal process was marred by late appointment of a barrister and lack of disclosure.
- The tribunal found the claimant was constructively unfairly dismissed and directly discriminated against because of his sexual orientation.
Timeline
-
Claimant contacts A and B via Grindr
The claimant, a gay head teacher, contacted two 17-year-old males via the Grindr app and arranged to meet them on three occasions, the third involving consensual sexual activity.
-
First PASM meeting
A Professional Abuse Strategy Meeting (PASM) was held to consider the claimant's conduct. Mr Latham was told the police had concerns about the youths' ability to consent, and it was decided to suspend the claimant.
-
Claimant suspended
Mr Latham, along with LEA officers, informed the claimant of his suspension on arrival at school, citing a child protection matter.
-
Second PASM meeting
A further PASM concluded there was no harm to a child, no criminal offence, and no section 47 investigation needed, but recommended disciplinary action against the claimant.
-
Claimant informed of disciplinary investigation
Mr Latham told the claimant his conduct would be investigated as a disciplinary matter.
-
Decision to refer to disciplinary hearing
Mr Latham and Mr Crowley, advised by HR and Mr Gordon, decided the allegations amounted to gross misconduct and should proceed to a disciplinary hearing.
-
Disciplinary hearing
The disciplinary panel, lacking experience, heard the case presented by Mr Gordon. Despite the claimant's objections, the panel dismissed him for gross misconduct.
-
Claimant appeals
The claimant lodged a detailed appeal, raising numerous procedural flaws and alleging homophobic bias.
-
Claimant resigns
The claimant sent a letter of resignation, citing the flawed process and his intention to pursue tribunal claims.
-
Remedy hearing
The tribunal held a remedy hearing, awarding £696,255.65 in compensation, including a 20% Polkey deduction.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the head teacher was constructively unfairly dismissed and whether the school's governing body directly discriminated against him because of his sexual orientation in the investigation, disciplinary process, and dismissal.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the head teacher's claims of constructive unfair dismissal and direct sexual orientation discrimination. The key reasons included a biased investigation report that omitted exculpatory evidence, a disciplinary panel that lacked experience and relied too heavily on LEA officers, and an appeal process marred by late appointment of a barrister and lack of disclosure.
Compensation:
- Basic award: £9,580.00
- Compensatory award: £514,953.70
- Polkey reduction: 20%
- Total: £696,255.65
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must ensure that investigators are impartial and that investigation reports include all relevant evidence, not just that supporting dismissal.
- Disciplinary panels should have appropriate experience and make independent decisions, not simply follow advice from local authority officers.
- Appeal processes must be conducted fairly, with proper disclosure and adequate time for preparation, or they risk being the 'last straw' in a constructive dismissal claim.
- Treating consensual adult activity differently because of sexual orientation can amount to direct discrimination, even if the employer claims it is about safeguarding.
- A Polkey reduction may apply if the employee would have been dismissed anyway, but only if the employer can show a fair process would have led to the same outcome.
A flawed process from the start
This case shows how a school's disciplinary process can go badly wrong when it is driven by external agendas and a lack of impartiality. The head teacher, a gay man, had consensual sexual contact with two 17-year-olds he met on Grindr. Although a professional abuse strategy meeting found no child protection or criminal issues, the school pursued disciplinary action. The investigation report was biased, containing subjective opinions and omitting evidence that could have helped the head teacher. The disciplinary panel, which lacked experience, effectively abdicated its decision-making role to local authority officers, treating their advice as instructions.
What the school could have done differently
The school could have avoided liability by ensuring the investigation was balanced and that the panel made its own decision based on all the evidence. Instead, the panel refused to adjourn for the head teacher to obtain documents, and the appeal process was mishandled with a late appointment of a barrister and lack of disclosure. The head teacher resigned after the appeal process broke down, which the tribunal accepted as the 'last straw' in a series of breaches of trust and confidence.
Why this result matters
The substantial award of nearly £700,000 reflects the serious impact on the head teacher's career and the finding of direct discrimination. The tribunal made a 20% Polkey reduction, accepting that the head teacher might have been dismissed even with a fair process, but still awarded a high compensatory sum. For employees, this case highlights the importance of a fair process and the risks for employers who allow bias or external influence to taint disciplinary decisions. For schools, it is a reminder that safeguarding concerns must be handled proportionately and without discrimination.
Similar cases
Care home manager who resigned over Covid vaccine mandate loses constructive dismissal claim
A care home manager with lupus who resigned after the Covid vaccine mandate was introduced has lost her constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims. The tribunal found no breach of trust and confidence.
Estate agent with Crohn's disease wins constructive dismissal and disability discrimination claim
An estate agent with Crohn's disease was constructively dismissed and discriminated against after her employer sidelined her due to her disability. The tribunal awarded £46,652.74.
18-year finance officer wins constructive dismissal after unfair re-grading and ignored grievance
A finance and commissioning officer with 18 years' service was constructively dismissed after Hertfordshire County Council unfairly re-graded her role and failed to properly consider her grievance. The tribunal awarded £66,476.86.
Railway signaller wins constructive dismissal case after employer ignored grievance outcome
A railway signaller who resigned after his employer failed to discipline a bullying manager as promised by a grievance outcome has won his constructive unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found a breach of trust and confidence.