M Dowding v The Character Group PLC

M Dowding v The Character Group PLC

The Employment Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal against the liability decision, finding that the Employment Tribunal applied the correct legal tests, gave sufficient reasons, and did not substitute its own view for that of the employer. The Tribunal’s findings on the claimant’s lack of subjective belief in the...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Mr M Dowding; Respondent: The Character Group plc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Liability and Costs Decisions
Outcome
Appeal against liability decision dismissed; appeal against costs decision allowed in part; remitted for reconsideration of indemnity basis and amount of costs of costs award.
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Protected Disclosure (whistleblowing), Costs Orders, Employment Tribunal Procedure
Employment Law Unfair Dismissal Protected Disclosure (whistleblowing) Costs Orders Employment Tribunal Procedure

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr M Dowding

Appellant/claimant

The Character Group plc

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Liability and Costs Decisions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in dismissing the complaint of ordinary unfair dismissal
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal erred in its approach to the investigation and procedure leading to dismissal
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal erred in awarding costs, including on the indemnity basis, and in the amount of the 'costs of costs' award

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal against the liability decision, finding that the Employment Tribunal applied the correct legal tests, gave sufficient reasons, and did not substitute its own view for that of the employer. The Tribunal’s findings on the claimant’s lack of subjective belief in the public interest for whistleblowing claims, and the fairness of the dismissal process, were upheld. However, the EAT allowed the appeal in part on costs: while the Tribunal had power to order indemnity costs, it failed to show whether, or why, the higher threshold for indemnity assessment was met, and did not sufficiently explain the amount awarded for the costs of the costs...

Court Disposition

Appeal against liability decision dismissed; appeal against costs decision allowed in part; remitted for reconsideration of indemnity basis and amount of costs of costs award.

Orders

  • Liability appeal dismissed; Tribunal’s findings on unfair dismissal and protected disclosure upheld.
  • Costs appeal allowed in part: direction for indemnity basis of main costs award quashed and remitted for reconsideration.