Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

In the case of Peters v Rock Chemicals Limited t/a Rock Oil Company 2404460/2015 the Employment Tribunal held that the dismissal of a 67-year-old employee was because of his age and not because of allegations that he was responsible for a failure to pay PAYE to HMRC.

Mr Peters commenced employment with Rock Chemicals Limited (“Rock Chemicals”) in 1998 as company accountant. His principal responsibility was to maintain the company accounts. He was also responsible for line managing a number of members of staff, including Ms Fiona Wright; Ms Fiona Wright was the sister of Charles Hewitt (Chairman of Rock Chemicals) and aunt to Greg Hewitt (Managing Director of Rock Chemicals). Ms Wright was responsible as Finance Manager for the receipt and payment of monies for the company.

In 2009, when Mr Peters was 62, there were discussions between Charles Hewitt and Mr Peters as to when he might retire; Mr Peters intimated that he might look to retire in 2011. Mr Peters did, however, not retire in 2011 but continued to work. In late 2011 a new employee, Mr Mullins started work with Rock Chemicals. In 2012 Mr Peters began to suspect that it was intended that Mr Mullins was to be his successor at the company, principally as Mr Mullins was introduced to the company’s bank as Mr Peters’ successor; Mr Peters’ relationship with Charles Hewitt, which was previously good, also started to deteriorate, with Mr Peters feeling that Mr Hewitt was ignoring .

In July 2012 Rock Chemicals was served with a penalty notice to the sum of £18,824.04 for late payment of PAYE. Charles Hewitt was extremely happy that the company had been served with a penalty notice, and Mr Peters was blamed for the penalty despite PAYE being Ms Wright’s area of responsibility. Mr Peters was in fact the only member of staff blamed for the PAYE penalty.

Various other allegations of poor performance were put to Mr Peters and he started to suffer from anxiety and stress. As a result of this he took his first period of certified sick leave from the company in March 2013. Later that month Rock Chemicals instructed  a medical practitioner to undertake a medical examination of Mr Peters, but the letter of instruction contained comments relating to Mr Peters’ age and his continuing ability to do his job. Rock Chemicals also failed to implement the recommendations of two medical reports regarding phasing Mr Peters back into the workplace and led to him about his bonus, as well as demanding the return of his company car and refusing to provide him with any information to allow him to respond to the allegations against him.

Mr Peters returned to work in December 2014 but was almost immediately upon his return to work subjected to a disciplinary investigation and dismissed on 14 January 2015, with one of the reasons for his dismissal being the serving of the penalty notice relating to PAYE. Other reasons for his dismissal included historical allegations that he had previously given an explanation for.

Mr Peters brought Employment Tribunal claims for unfair dismissal, age discrimination, and breach of contract. The claim came to the Manchester Employment Tribunal in October 2015 and the Employment Tribunal found in Mr Peter’s favour in all three heads of claim.

With regards to the unfair dismissal claim, the Employment Tribunal found that Rock Chemicals had pre-determined Mr Peters’ culpability for the conduct he was dismissed for, that the company had failed to carry out a reasonable investigation (in particular, it had failed to provide relevant requested documents to Mr Peters), and that Charles Hewitt, the dismissing officer, did not have a reasonable or genuine belief that Mr Peters was culpable of the allegations put to him.

With regards to the age discrimination claim, the Employment Tribunal found that Mr Peters’ dismissal and the conduct leading up to his dismissal were inextricably linked with Mr Peters’ age, finding that the events leading up to Mr Peters’ dismissal allowed an inference of age discrimination – an inference that Rock Chemicals could not rebut.

The Employment Tribunal also found that there had been a breach of contract in not paying Mr Peters his 2013 bonus. Rock Chemicals failed in a counter-claim against Mr Peters.

Chris Hadrill, a specialist employment solicitor at Redmans, commented on the case: “In the event of any allegations of misconduct employers should be careful to treat the relevant employees reasonably and to take measured steps that are in accordance with established disciplinary procedures – if the employer fails to treat the employee reasonably or deviates from accepted practice then this could lead to a finding of unfair dismissal or, even, a finding that such conduct constitutes an inference of discrimination (as in this case).”

About

Redmans Employment Team deal with employment matters for both employers and employees, including drafting employment contracts and policies, advising employers and employees on compromise agreements, handling day-to-day HR issues, advising on restructures, and handling Employment Tribunal cases for both employers and employees Call 020 3397 3603 to speak to one of the members of our employment team or email us on enquiries@redmans.co.uk. Redmans have offices in Richmond, Chiswick, Hammersmith, Fulham, Kingston, Wimbledon, Ealing, Kings Cross and Marylebone (meetings strictly by appointment only).

Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

Share →

Our awards

Request a callback

Your name

Your email

Your telephone number

Contact us

Please feel free to discuss your own position and concerns. Contact your nearest office on:

T: 020 3397 3603
E: enquiries@redmans.co.uk
W: www.redmans.co.uk

Testimonials

4.73 Average

93 Reviews

Mohamed F

Excellent and professional solicitors, highly recommended

Posted 18 hours ago

Anonymous

Redmans Solicitors provided a professional and prompt service in dealing with my settlement agreement. They used their experience to negotiate a better deal for which I am grateful for. I highly recommend their services.

Posted 3 days ago

Cheryl R

Very efficient and friendly lawyers. I have used Redmans twice now and Chris Hadrill has been amazing to work with. Would highly recommend Redmans.

Posted 3 days ago

Anonymous

I found Redmans Solicitors to be extremely professional, dealing with my questions and concerns quickly and in detail. I would have no hesitation in recommending Redmans Solicitors to anyone.

Posted 3 days ago

Anonymous

I requested Redmans services on a redundancy case. Both Chris and Rana were great, thoughtful, very professional and responded quickly. They were very clear throughout the entire process, regarding the process and my options and I couldn't feel I had better legal advice for my case. Overall excellent service and I would certainly recommend and use their services again.

Posted 1 week ago

Anonymous

Responsive, patient, thorough and personable - an excellent service.

Posted 1 week ago

Anonymous

The team at Redmans, Chris Hadrill and Sacha Barrett were always very helpful and had expert knowledge to assist me during my employment law matter, I would not hesitate to recommend them to all!

Posted 1 week ago

Arun T

Chris was punctual, attentive and accurate. He answered my questions with clarity and avoided dubiosity. I would recommend him to anyone seeking legal advice within his remit.

Posted 1 week ago

Yulian Z

Great service

Posted 1 week ago

Anonymous

Excellent, professional service and a speedy resolution. Many thanks

Posted 1 week ago

Taral P

Sacha and Chris were both very helpful in closing out my matter. Sacha was very clear in helping me understanding the documents I needed reviewing, providing a professional service throughout.

Posted 1 week ago

Anonymous

Really pleased with the swift and professional service from Redmans. They provided very clear advice and helped conclude my matter with the minimum of stress or delay.

Posted 1 week ago

Matthew L

Redmans were very quick to respond to my initial enquiry, and provided me with a very effective and efficient service, generating a most satisfactory outcome. I would definitely use them again if the need arose.

Posted 1 week ago

Anonymous

First rate service. Warm and friendly whilst exceptionally efficient at the same time. I would highly recommend them.

Posted 1 week ago

Anonymous

Professional and helpful. Thorough and supportive.

Posted 1 week ago

Richard A

Excellent service, prompt replies, great advice

Posted 1 week ago

Anonymous

Very professional services

Posted 1 week ago

Margaret

Redmans Solicitors took a lot of the worry away and were very thoughtful and meticulous in their dealings with my case , thank you very mush , great service and a great job

Posted 1 month ago

Mark B

Prompt efficient service. Hourly, and part thereof, billing got a bit stressful at times - as opposed to flat fee - made me think twice about sending an email or making a quick call when I had a query because it would have eaten up minutes from my budget. But happy with the legal service I received overall and would recommend.

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

Chris Hadrill has provided a truly wonderful service and was willing to lend his support and expertise at a time when other solicitors, only wanted to discuss their fees! A clear thinking and down to earth professional, Chris can be trusted to listen carefully to your matter, cut through the fog, and advise you on the best (and most realistic) way forward, saving you time, money and heartache. It will be helpful if you first get your ducks in a row in terms of documents / evidence etc. and then contact Chris, (that’s what we did) as this will help your matter to be dealt with faster. The more organised and together you are the more successful you will be. You'll be fine with Chris, I highly recommend him. Good luck!

Posted 1 month ago

Richard v

Excellent Service

Posted 2 months ago