A tax official has been ordered to pay £20,000 to HM Revenue and Customs after an employment tribunal ruled he acted 'vexatiously and abusively' in refusing to return to the office following Covid lockdowns.
The Case Against Martin Bentley
Martin Bentley, a former HMRC worker, attempted to sue his employer for disability discrimination after declining to resume office-based work. The tribunal, held in Liverpool, determined there was 'no medical reason' preventing his return to the workplace.
Employment Judge Dawn Shotter found that Mr Bentley was 'prepared to use whatever means he could' to avoid working from the office and never meeting his managers face-to-face. The judgment noted that HMRC had 'reluctantly' made adjustments for him, despite the lack of medical justification for a permanent shift to home working.
Tribunal Findings and Exaggerated Evidence
The panel concluded that Mr Bentley had exaggerated his evidence concerning his health conditions. Judge Shotter stated the claim had 'no reasonable prospect of success' from the outset.
As a result of these findings, the judge ordered the substantial payment to HMRC. The ruling highlighted that Mr Bentley achieved his aim of never returning to the office before his retirement in September 2024.
Wider Implications for Home Workers
This case serves as a significant warning for employees and employers across the UK navigating post-pandemic work arrangements. It underscores that while flexible working is increasingly common, formal requests may require legitimate medical or contractual justification.
The tribunal's decision reinforces that employment claims must be brought in good faith and with reasonable prospects of success, or individuals could face severe financial penalties for what the court deems 'vexatious' proceedings.
