Probation dismissal after unfounded discrimination allegations: costs awarded against claimant
A Tax Manager with six months' service who made multiple false allegations of harassment and discrimination was fairly dismissed during probation. The tribunal struck out his unfair dismissal claim and ordered him to pay £10,000 in costs.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Tax Manager from 22 July 2019 until his dismissal on 24 January 2020.
- The claimant alleged he was called 'Pushti' (meaning gay in Greek) by a colleague, but the tribunal found this did not occur.
- The claimant made numerous allegations of harassment and discrimination against multiple colleagues, all of which were found to be untrue.
- The claimant's unfair dismissal claim was struck out due to insufficient service (less than two years).
- The tribunal found the claimant's direct discrimination claim had no prospect of success because it relied on mutually exclusive grounds.
- The claimant was ordered to pay £10,000 in costs for unreasonable conduct and pursuing a meritless claim.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment as Tax Manager at Optivo.
-
First complaint to manager
Claimant told his manager Stephen Heyes that he had been called 'Pushti' by a colleague.
-
Email complaint about bullying
Claimant emailed Stephen Heyes alleging bullying by multiple colleagues.
-
Meeting with manager
Stephen Heyes met with claimant to discuss allegations; claimant moved desks.
-
Formal grievance submitted
Claimant submitted a formal grievance to HR.
-
Grievance meeting
Jackie Pauley investigated the grievance; claimant repeated the Pushti allegation.
-
Grievance outcome
Grievance not upheld; outcome letter sent.
-
Grievance appeal
Claimant appealed the grievance outcome.
-
Dismissal
Claimant dismissed for failing probation; grievance appeal also dismissed.
-
ET1 presented
Claimant brought claims for discrimination, harassment, victimisation, and unfair dismissal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant could bring an unfair dismissal claim despite having less than two years' service, and whether his claims of sexual orientation discrimination, harassment, and victimisation had any merit.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant had only six months' service, falling short of the two-year qualifying period. The discrimination claims were dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success, as the tribunal found the alleged 'Pushti' comment and other harassment did not occur.
- The claimant was ordered to pay £10,000 in costs for pursuing a meritless claim and unreasonable conduct.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employees with less than two years' service cannot bring an unfair dismissal claim, unless the dismissal is for an automatically unfair reason like whistleblowing or discrimination.
- Making multiple unfounded allegations of discrimination can backfire, leading to costs orders if the tribunal finds the claims were pursued unreasonably.
- Tribunals take a dim view of claimants who rely on mutually exclusive grounds for discrimination claims, as this undermines credibility.
The case in practice
This case illustrates the risks of bringing discrimination claims based on allegations that cannot be substantiated. The claimant, a Tax Manager, alleged he was called 'Pushti' (a Greek word meaning gay) by a colleague, but the tribunal found this did not happen. He then made a series of complaints about bullying and harassment against multiple colleagues, all of which were investigated and not upheld. His dismissal during probation was based on performance issues, not discrimination.
What the employer did right
Optivo followed a proper process: it investigated the claimant's grievances, held meetings, and provided outcomes. The tribunal noted that the claimant's allegations were thoroughly examined and found to be without foundation. The employer's decision to dismiss during probation was reasonable given the claimant's conduct and performance.
Why this result matters
The case reinforces that the two-year service requirement for unfair dismissal claims is strictly applied, and that discrimination claims must be based on credible evidence. Claimants who pursue vexatious allegations risk not only losing their case but also being ordered to pay the other side's costs. Here, the claimant was ordered to pay £10,000 for unreasonable conduct.
Similar cases
Social worker's race discrimination claim over 'aggressive' stereotype dismissed
A black social worker with 15 years' service lost her claims of race discrimination and constructive dismissal after an altercation with a white colleague. The tribunal found no evidence of stereotyping or unfair treatment.
Labourer's race discrimination claim survives strike-out bid despite late witness statement
A construction labourer who alleges he was subjected to monkey chants and racist abuse can proceed with his claim after the tribunal refused to strike it out, despite his late compliance with orders.
31-year employee made redundant: tribunal upholds fairness despite missed consultations
A tribunal has ruled that Wolseley UK Limited fairly dismissed a long-serving employee by reason of redundancy, rejecting claims of age discrimination, harassment, and victimisation.
Legal secretary awarded £29,000 after assault and protected disclosures
A trainee legal secretary who was assaulted by her employer and made protected disclosures has won claims of unfair dismissal, sex discrimination, harassment and victimisation. She was awarded £28,986.85.