Mr M P O'Brien v Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council and The Governing Body of St Margaret’s C of E Primary School: 2400104/2017 - Dismissal

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS

Case No 2400104/2017

Between

Mr M P O'BrienClaimant

Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council and The Governing Body of St Margaret’s C of E Primary SchoolRespondent

Before

Regional Employment Judge Robertson

Date 4 July 2017

JUDGMENT

[1]The claimant's complaint of unlawful disability discrimination within the Equality Act 2010 is dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant.

[2]The claimant's application under rule 13 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 for reconsideration of the decision under rule 12 to reject the claim against the second respondent is allowed and the claim is accepted against the second respondent.

[3]Case Management Orders for the continuing good conduct of the claim are given separately. Regional Employment Judge Robertson Date 20 March 2017

[1]By 4 May 2017 the claimant will inform the respondents and the Employment Tribunal which of the two named respondents it accepts is the correct employer for the purposes of the claim of unfair dismissal. The respondents’ position is that the second respondent is the claimant's employer, the Governing Body having complied with the requirements of the Education Act 2002.

[2]By 4 May 2017 the claimant shall send to the respondents a fully particularised Schedule of Loss.

[3]By 18 May 2017 the parties shall send to each other copies of all documents relevant to the issues to be determined in their possession, custody or control.

[4]The respondents shall send one copy of the complete agreed bundle to the claimant by 1 June 2017.

[5]The parties shall send to each other copies of all witness evidence to be adduced at the hearing by 15 June 2017. Case No. 2400104/2017 2

[6]The matter will be heard in the Manchester Employment Tribunal, Alexandra House, 14-22 The Parsonage, Manchester, M3 2JA on 6 and 7 July 2017 inclusive commencing each day at 10.00am to determine matters of liability and remedy if appropriate. Note of Discussion

[7]The Employment Judge heard submissions on the jurisdictional matter and held that the Tribunal had jurisdiction to determine the claim. A case management discussion was held immediately thereafter and directions given.

[8]The parties agreed the issues to be determined were:(1) Whether the respondents could establish a potentially fair reason for dismissal – the respondents rely upon conduct.

(2) If so, whether the reason to dismiss was fair in the circumstances applying section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

(3) If the claimant had been unfairly dismissed issues of remedy, being whether the claimant had contributed to his dismissal by his conduct to any extent.

(4) Whether the Polkey principles applied and whether either party had unreasonably failed to comply with the ACAS Code of Conduct on Disciplinary Proceedings.

(5) Whether the respondents acted in breach of the claimant's entitlement to notice of termination of employment by summarily dismissing him. Employment Judge Howard Date 20th April 2017