Unfair Dismissal - 'Personality'

Mr Ian Perkin, who was dismissed by his employer because of his personality and management style, failed in his attempt to win compensation for unfair dismissal in the Court of Appeal. He has since set up a website devoted to his case on which he states that he is now seeking leave to appeal to the House of Lords. If he is refused, he says he will use the European courts to pursue his case.

The Court of Appeal dismissed Mr Perkin’s appeal as on the facts of the case as found by the Employment Tribunal (ET), St George’s Healthcare NHS Trust had acted reasonably in dismissing him for ‘some other substantial reason of a kind as to justify the dismissal of an employee holding the position which the employee held’, under the Employment Rights Act 1996. Evidence was given that Mr Perkin was ‘aloof, stubborn and at times intimidating’. Even had his employer followed fair dismissal procedures, Mr Perkin’s personality had manifested itself in such a way that it was certain that he would have been dismissed anyway. The Court judged that the reason to dismiss Mr Perkin should not have been described as ‘conduct’ but this was not fatal to the ET’s decision. The Court of Appeal would not ‘second-guess’ the finding on the facts by the ET and the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) that it would have been quite impossible for Mr Perkin to work with certain colleagues again, one of whom he had called ‘a bully and a liar’. It was therefore open to the ET to find that Mr Perkin was 100 per cent to blame for his dismissal and so no compensation should be awarded to him.

Mr Perkin has since been referred to in the press as the ‘St George’s whistleblower’. The Court of Appeal noted that Mr Perkin’s original claim to the ET had included a claim that he had been dismissed for making ‘protected disclosures’ but the ET had rejected the claim and Mr Perkin did not appeal against this finding to the EAT or to the Court of Appeal.

Mr Perkin is reported to be seeking approximately £650,000 in compensation.