Urbis Academy Trust and Mayville Primary School

Case Summary

The claimant was fairly dismissed. The complaints of unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, direct race discrimination, and victimisation were all dismissed.

The tribunal found that the claimant's dismissal was fair, both procedurally and substantively, and that the claims of unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, direct race discrimination, and victimisation had no merit.

• •unfair dismissal and breach of contract/wrongful dismissal
• •race discrimination and victimisation

1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Ms C Russell Respondent: (1) Urbis Academy Trust (2) Mayville Primary School Heard at: East London Hearing Centre On: 28, 29, 30 September, 1, 5 October 2021, 24, 25 and 26 January 2022; and in chambers On 24 and 25 February 2022 Before: Employment Judge Jones Members: Ms S Harwood Mrs B Saund Representation Claimant: Ms Godwins (lay representative) Respondent: Mr Gray-Jones (Counsel) RESERVED JUDGMENT 1. The Claimant was fairly dismissed. 2. The complaints of unfair dismissal and breach of contract/wrongful dismissal fail and are dismissed. 3. The complaints of race discrimination and victimisation fail and are dismissed. REASONS 1. These were Claimant’s complaints of unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, direct race discrimination and victimisation on grounds of race. An agreed list of issues was in the trial bundle and will be referred to by the Tribunal below in the judgment part of these reasons. 2 2. The Tribunal apologises to both parties for the delay in the promulgation of this judgment and reasons. This delay was due to the pressure of work on the judge arising from the pandemic, difficulties in finding dates to meet with the lay members and the judge’s ill-health at the end of the summer. Evidence 3. The Respondent made an application under rule 50 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, that the Claimant’s colleague who was named in these proceedings, should be made the subject of a restricted reporting order. The reason for doing so was that the Claimant’s colleague was facing criminal proceedings in relation to her conduct at work. She had also been dismissed. The Respondent submitted that she was facing a number of allegations, which if they were discussed in this hearing and evidence given on them, could affect the integri…