Suspension after tribunal claim: dismissal for breakdown of trust upheld
A Computer Officer with 16 years' service was dismissed after his working relationships broke down. The tribunal found the dismissal was for a substantial reason and not victimisation for bringing previous claims.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #breakdown-of-trust-and-confidence
- #protected-acts
- #victimisation
- #some-other-substantial-reason
- #suspension
- #dismissal
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Computer Officer from 22 May 2001 until dismissal on 8 May 2017.
- The claimant brought two previous Employment Tribunal claims against the respondent, which were dismissed.
- The claimant was suspended on 1 March 2017, the day after his second tribunal claim was dismissed.
- An independent investigation concluded there was a case to answer regarding breakdown of the working relationship.
- The dismissing officer found the relationship had irretrievably broken down and dismissed the claimant.
- The Employment Appeal Tribunal remitted the issue of whether suspension and dismissal were because of protected acts.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment with the Medical Research Council as a Computer Officer.
-
First tribunal claim issued
Claimant brought his first Employment Tribunal claim for discrimination (case 1501358/2010).
-
First tribunal claim dismissed
Reserved judgment dismissed the claimant's complaints; appeal later dismissed in June 2013.
-
Second tribunal claim issued
Claimant issued a second claim for race discrimination, disability discrimination and victimisation (case 3400450/2016).
-
Second tribunal claim dismissed
Oral judgment dismissing the claimant's second claim; full reasons sent on 12 June 2017.
-
Claimant suspended
On return to work, claimant was suspended pending investigation into breakdown of working relationships.
-
Claimant dismissed
After a hearing, Dr Peatfield dismissed the claimant for some other substantial reason (breakdown of trust and confidence).
-
Appeal dismissed
Appeal panel upheld the dismissal decision.
-
Full merits hearing
Employment Tribunal heard the claimant's claims of unfair dismissal and victimisation over four days.
-
Original judgment
Tribunal dismissed all claims; written reasons sent on 28 August 2019.
-
Remitted issues judgment
On remission from EAT, Tribunal found suspension and dismissal were not because of protected acts.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's suspension and dismissal were acts of victimisation because he had previously brought employment tribunal claims (protected acts), and whether the dismissal was unfair.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It found that the reason for dismissal was a breakdown of trust and confidence, which is a potentially fair reason of 'some other substantial reason'. The employer had carried out a reasonable investigation and followed a fair procedure. The tribunal also found that the suspension and dismissal were not motivated by the claimant's previous tribunal claims, so there was no victimisation.
No compensation was awarded as the claims were dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Bringing a previous tribunal claim does not automatically protect you from dismissal if your working relationships genuinely break down.
- Employers can rely on 'some other substantial reason' to dismiss if the employment relationship has irretrievably broken down, provided they follow a fair process.
- Suspension pending investigation is not automatically an act of victimisation if there are genuine concerns about working relationships.
- Length of service does not prevent dismissal if the relationship is beyond repair, but a fair procedure is still essential.
A long career ends in breakdown of trust
This case shows how a long-serving employee can still be fairly dismissed when working relationships break down, even if they have previously brought tribunal claims. The claimant, a Computer Officer with 16 years' service, was suspended the day after his second tribunal claim was dismissed. He was later dismissed for 'some other substantial reason' – the irretrievable breakdown of trust and confidence.
The tribunal heard that the employer had carried out an independent investigation which concluded there was a case to answer. The dismissing officer held a hearing and decided the relationship could not be repaired. The claimant argued the real reason was victimisation for his protected acts (the previous claims), but the tribunal rejected this.
What the employer did right
The employer followed a clear process: suspension was not automatic, an investigation was conducted, and the claimant was given a chance to respond. The tribunal noted the employer had considered mediation but believed the claimant would not engage. This careful approach helped the employer show the dismissal was for a genuine reason and not a pretext.
What this means for similar claims
Employees who have brought previous claims are protected from victimisation, but that protection is not absolute. If an employer can show a genuine, non-retaliatory reason for dismissal – such as a breakdown in working relationships – and follows a fair procedure, the dismissal can be upheld. The key is whether the employer's belief in the breakdown is reasonable and whether the process is fair.
Similar cases
Whistleblowing claims dismissed: council's breakdown of trust was genuine
A Community Development Manager who claimed she was dismissed for whistleblowing lost her case. The tribunal found the council's decision was due to an irretrievable breakdown in working relationships, not her protected disclosures.
Shouting at the boss: dismissal for irretrievable breakdown of trust upheld
A married couple who worked as wedding events and facilities managers were fairly dismissed after a heated meeting where the husband shouted at the company owner. The tribunal rejected claims of unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, and whistleblowing detriment.
Harassment and victimisation: employer forwarded discrimination complaint to the alleged harasser
A former employee has won her harassment and victimisation claims after her employer forwarded her emails alleging sex discrimination to the person she complained about, who then called her. She was later dismissed.
Union representative dismissed after relationship breakdown: victimisation and unfair dismissal
A PE teacher and union rep was unfairly dismissed after a breakdown in relationships with school leadership. The tribunal found her suspension and dismissal were acts of victimisation, but reduced compensation by 50% for her own conduct.