JPP Law Blog
Engineer sacked while depressed wins employment claim
An engineer who was sacked while off work with depression has won his claim of unfair dismissal after a tribunal ruled that the employer had been "totally unreasonable".
Andrew Mitchell started working as a software engineer for Amiho Technology in Cambridgeshire in 2011. He claimed he had a difficult relationship with some of his managers, whom he described as bullying and intimidating.
Mr Mitchell was involved in a workplace argument in 2015, which led to disciplinary proceedings for gross misconduct. He said the company sent him emails that gave him the impression that the process was being used to get him to leave or face being sacked.
He then signed off work on three occasions, suffering from depression. On the third occasion, he was told that the company would proceed with its sickness absence procedure and would obtain medical reports. His manager added that when his sickness period ended, he would remain suspended while the disciplinary proceedings continued.
While he was off work, the company continued to contact him about the gross negligence matter and he was given as little as two days to respond to correspondence.
He was sacked in July 2016 following a dismissal meeting, which was held despite Mr Mitchell informing the company that he had difficulty functioning because of the prescription medicine he was taking.
The Employment Tribunal found that the dismissal was unfair. It described the time limit for replying to emails while he was off sick was "totally unreasonable".
The company had failed to make reasonable adjustments for Mitchell's mental health and made no attempt at mediation. Nor did it consider suspending the disciplinary process until Mr Mitchell was able to cope with it.
Employment Judge Laidler said: "The claimant's dismissal was clearly unfavourable treatment because of something arising from his disability, as he was dismissed because of his sickness absence, which was entirely down to his disability, and because he could not say when he would return.
"The respondent knew or reasonably ought to have known that he was disabled by the time of the dismissal meeting. The dismissal clearly amounted to unfavourable treatment."
The level of compensation will be decided at a further hearing.
For further advice on any of the issues raised in this article, or for employment law advice more generally, please contact JPP Law on 020 3468 3064 or email info@jpplaw.co.uk
JPP Law Blog

- Case Studies and Reviews (9)
- Commercial Law (90)
- Dispute Resolution (27)
- Employment Law (118)
- Intellectual Property (2)
- Start-ups (21)
- Videos (8)
- 2021 March (1)
- 2021 February (1)
- 2021 January (1)
- 2020 December (1)
- 2020 November (2)
- 2020 October (2)
- 2020 September (2)
- 2020 August (1)
- 2020 July (3)
- 2020 June (1)
- 2020 May (3)
- 2020 April (1)
- 2020 March (2)
- 2020 February (2)
- 2020 January (2)
- 2019 December (2)
- 2019 October (1)
- 2019 September (5)
- 2019 July (3)
- 2019 June (2)
- 2019 May (2)
- 2019 April (3)
- 2019 March (2)
- 2019 February (2)
- 2019 January (2)
- 2018 December (2)
- 2018 October (4)
- 2018 September (12)
- 2018 February (6)
- 2018 January (7)
- 2017 December (2)
- 2018 July (14)
- 2018 June (2)
- 2018 May (13)
- 2018 April (8)
- 2018 March (11)
- 2017 November (6)
- 2017 October (12)
- 2017 September (14)
- 2017 July (7)
- 2017 June (10)
- 2017 May (6)
- 2017 April (4)
- 2017 March (11)
- 2017 February (6)
- 2017 January (1)
- 2016 December (2)
- 2016 September (4)
- 2016 July (1)