Mr N Hepburn v Hexagon Sociedad Anonima: S/4121031/2018
| Judgment Date | 22 January 2019 |
| Subject Matter | Public Interest Disclosure |
| Date | 22 January 2019 |
| Citation | S/4121031/2018 |
| Published date | 30 January 2019 |
| Court | Employment Tribunal |
E.T. Z4 (WR)
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND)
5
Case No: S/4121031/18 Held at Aberdeen on 19 December 2018
Employment Judge: Mr N M Hosie (sitting alone)
10
Mr N Hepburn Claimant
Represented by:
Mr B Nichol –
Solicitor
15
Hexagon Sociedad Anonima Respondent
Represented by:
Mr A Knight –
20
Solicitor
JUDGMENT OF THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL
25
The Judgment of the Tribunal is that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to consider the
claim.
REASONS
30
Introduction
1. The claim in this case comprises a complaint of automatic unfair dismissal for
making a protected disclosure. There would also appear to be a complaint
35
of “standard” unfair dismissal, but this is not entirely clear. The claim is denied
in its entirety by the respondent. The respondent maintains that the reason
S/4121031/18 Page 2
was “some other substantial one”, namely so-called “sub-party pressure to
dismiss”, and that it was fair.
2. In addition, the respondent’s solicitor took the preliminary point that the
Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to consider the claim as the claimant
5
worked abroad and there was not “a sufficiently strong connection” with the
UK.
3. This case came before me, therefore, by way of a Preliminary Hearing, to
consider and determine that preliminary issue.
10
The Evidence
4. I first heard evidence from the claimant.
15
5. I then heard evidence on behalf of the respondent from the following
witnesses, each of whom spoke to written statements: -
• Jim Beveridge, Senior Vice-President of Africa Operations, Wood Group
UK Ltd
20
• Ali Brooks, HR Team Lead
• Jose Alessandrello, Operations Manager.
6. A joint bundle of documentary productions was also lodged (“P”).
25
The Facts
7. By and large, these were either agreed or not disputed. Helpfully, the parties’
solicitors also lodged a detailed “Agreed Statement of Facts”, which was
consistent with the oral evidence which I heard.
30
To continue reading
Request your trial