A senior costs specialist who previously worked for a prominent law firm has lost his appeal against an employment tribunal’s decision that he was not unfairly dismissed nor harassed at work.
Judge Bruce Carr KC, presiding over the Employment Appeal Tribunal, acknowledged that the original employment tribunal (ET) had erred in one aspect. However, he concluded it would not have affected the overall outcome. The former lawyer, Rob Moon, succeeded on a single ground, which was his claim of a right to appeal the redundancy decision. Despite this, the ET in 2021 ruled that awarding him damages was unjust as an appeal would not have succeeded.
Moon, who led a small team in the firm’s Cardiff office, was made redundant amid dissatisfaction with the allocation of work and other issues that raised several grievances and tribunal claims. He also experienced anxiety and depression, resulting in periods of sick leave. Moon argued he was unfairly dismissed from his £53,000-a-year post and alleged discrimination and harassment based on disability, as well as victimization.
Moreover, Moon claimed there were unauthorised deductions from his wages and a failure to make reasonable adjustments. The ET determined his dismissal was due to redundancy, rejecting these claims. The appeal involved three grounds, including one concerning Moon’s bonus. Judge Carr dismissed this appeal and supported the firm’s cross-appeal, indicating the ET misapplied the statutory definition of wages but stating this did not merit the appeal’s success.
While Moon asserted his entitlement to a bonus, Judge Carr clarified it was subject to discretion and did not fulfill the necessary definition. He indicated that to succeed, Moon needed to show his bonus entitlement had solidified into an ascertainable amount that was unpaid. Judge Carr noted that even if the firm’s discretion was exercised irrationally or capriciously, the ET could not have determined the correct amount, thus the claim fell outside the Employment Rights Act 1996’s jurisdiction.
Judge Carr further dismissed appeals regarding harassment and unfair dismissal. The ET concluded the firm’s conduct did not reasonably cause the effects on Moon, and correctly examined redundancy as the reason for dismissal, rejecting Moon’s competing argument. The firm’s successful cross-appeal added grounds to dismiss Moon’s claims of unlawful deductions, and no further orders were required.
The tribunal’s rulings underscore the complexities involved in employment law disputes, particularly concerning redundancy situations and claims of unfair treatment.
