header-logo header-logo

28 November 2018
Issue: 7819 / Categories: Legal News , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-detail

Unfair dismissal led to £1m award

A former NHS employee has been awarded £1m compensation after being unfairly dismissed following an incident in a hospital car park.

The claim, before Judge Sage at London (South) Employment Tribunal, Croydon (Hastings v King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust Case No: 2300394/2016) was brought by Richard Hastings, a former IT manager at the Trust. Hastings was accused of assault in 2015 after attempting to note down a delivery van’s registration number and to defend himself when racially abused and assaulted by the delivery driver. 

Hastings called hospital security for help but no record of the call was logged and nobody came to his aid, although the security office confirmed they had received the call. He was subsequently dismissed for gross misconduct.

However, the tribunal found the disciplinary processes of the hospital trust were biased and discriminatory. Failings included a difference in treatment between the contractors in the delivery van and Hastings, a British man of Caribbean descent, whose evidence was shown to have been treated with distrust and disbelief. The tribunal found Hastings to be an honest witness, while identifying inconsistencies and flaws in the opposing evidence.

Hastings was represented by Louise Brown, solicitor, and Carole Spencer, paralegal, at Excello Law. Brown said: ‘The tribunal found that the Trust's initial investigation into Mr Hastings' suspension was “fundamentally flawed” and served only to support the organisation's bias towards our client.

‘The substantial damages awarded by the tribunal reflect the significant loss of Mr Hastings’ pension rights following his dismissal and serve as a timely reminder to employers with final salary schemes in place that a failure to follow fair, unbiased and thorough disciplinary procedures, that are not tainted with discrimination, can result in huge compensation awards.’

Issue: 7819 / Categories: Legal News , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll