header-logo header-logo

28 November 2018
Issue: 7819 / Categories: Legal News , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-detail

Unfair dismissal led to £1m award

A former NHS employee has been awarded £1m compensation after being unfairly dismissed following an incident in a hospital car park.

The claim, before Judge Sage at London (South) Employment Tribunal, Croydon (Hastings v King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust Case No: 2300394/2016) was brought by Richard Hastings, a former IT manager at the Trust. Hastings was accused of assault in 2015 after attempting to note down a delivery van’s registration number and to defend himself when racially abused and assaulted by the delivery driver. 

Hastings called hospital security for help but no record of the call was logged and nobody came to his aid, although the security office confirmed they had received the call. He was subsequently dismissed for gross misconduct.

However, the tribunal found the disciplinary processes of the hospital trust were biased and discriminatory. Failings included a difference in treatment between the contractors in the delivery van and Hastings, a British man of Caribbean descent, whose evidence was shown to have been treated with distrust and disbelief. The tribunal found Hastings to be an honest witness, while identifying inconsistencies and flaws in the opposing evidence.

Hastings was represented by Louise Brown, solicitor, and Carole Spencer, paralegal, at Excello Law. Brown said: ‘The tribunal found that the Trust's initial investigation into Mr Hastings' suspension was “fundamentally flawed” and served only to support the organisation's bias towards our client.

‘The substantial damages awarded by the tribunal reflect the significant loss of Mr Hastings’ pension rights following his dismissal and serve as a timely reminder to employers with final salary schemes in place that a failure to follow fair, unbiased and thorough disciplinary procedures, that are not tainted with discrimination, can result in huge compensation awards.’

Issue: 7819 / Categories: Legal News , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll