In the case of Mr A Dogra v Acetrip Ltd: 3200557/2016 (a remedy judgment) the Employment Tribunal awarded Mr Dogra over £124,000, after having previously found that his dismissal had been due to his making a protected disclosure and asserting a statutory right (and therefore automatically unfair).
The facts in Dogra v Acetrip Ltd
The Employment Tribunal had, in a previous liability judgment (which is not publicly available at this time), found in favour of Mr Dogra in respect of the following claims:
- Automatic unfair dismissal (due to protected disclosures being made (section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996) and for asserting statutory rights (section 104 Employment Rights Act 1996)
- Wrongful dismissal
- Unlawful deduction from wages
In this hearing the Employment Tribunal considered the remedy that Mr Dogra was entitled to.
The decision of the Employment Tribunal
The Employment Tribunal determined that reinstatement or re-engagement was not appropriate on the facts of the case and, equally, Mr Dogra had indictated that he was not interested in this remedy.
The Employment Tribunal awarded Mr Dogra the following sums in compensation:
- Notice period (gross): £442.31
- Past loss to the date of the Tribunal hearing (gross): £51,307.96 – the Employment Tribunal held that Mr Dogra had taken reasonable steps to mitigate the loss of earnings that arose from his dismissal and, in any event, his inability to obtain a further Tier 2 visa had precluded him from working for anyone else in the UK; the Employment Tribunal also found that he could not rely on receiving a positive reference from Acetrip, which also made it difficult for him to obtain new employment
- Future loss of earnings (gross): £51,750.27
- ACAS uplift on compensatory award (@25%): £21,158.28 – the Employment Tribunal held that Acetrip had manifestly failed to carry out any of the disciplinary procedures that it would have been expected to (including holding a hearing, allowing the employee to state their case, making sure that he was aware of the disciplinary allegations, and allowing them an opportunity to appeal)
Mr Dogra was not awarded a sum in respect of a basic award as he had not achieved two years’ qualifying service as of the termination date.
The total award made to Mr Dogra therefore amounted to £124,658.82.
Our solicitors’ view on Dogra v Acetrip Ltd
Chris Hadrill, partner in the employment department at Redmans, commented on the case: “Although we do not have access to the liability judgment, the remedy judgment in this case makes it clear that this case was particularly serious given that it related to incidents of migrant worker exploitation and dismissal due to ‘whistleblowing’. The value of the remedy judgment arguably reflects the severity of the conduct in this case.”
The judgment of the Employment Tribunal in Mr A Dogra v Acetrip Ltd: 3200557/2016 can be found here.