An experienced solicitor suspended by the Legal Aid Agency after a heated WhatsApp exchange with colleagues has lost claims for victimisation and discrimination.

Mark Gaskell had threatened to send a hard copy of the WhatsApp transcript to the Law Society after bosses at the LAA began a formal investigation following complaints from colleagues.

Gaskell, who had been with the organisation since 1985, was suspended from work in May 2020. He was told the working relationship had broken down and there was reasonable suspicion of a risk to Ministry of Justice property and/or reputation.

His sanction was later reduced to a final written warning and then a first written warning on the basis that Gaskell did not actually disclose any information to the Law Society and given the failure to provide him with details of complaints about him.

Gaskell brought employment claims for victimisation, discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments for his health condition, as well as claims for indirect age discrimination over an earlier appointment of a colleague to a senior post. He submitted that the LAA’s treatment of him after the WhatsApp incident was influenced by the fact he had brought two previous claims against his employer.

Following a 12-day hearing in February at Leeds, Employment Judge Shepherd said the unanimous judgment of the tribunal was that all Gaskell's claims should be dismissed.

The judge said Gaskell’s threat to share information with the Law Society was ‘conduct capable of amounting to gross misconduct. The claimant’s behaviour was a major concern to the [LAA],’ said the judge. ‘The disciplinary proceedings were not disproportionate and the tribunal is satisfied that they were not influenced by the fact that the claimant had brought the first and/or second claim.’

The tribunal heard that a contract manager who worked alongside Gaskell had raised a complaint about inappropriate behaviour in a WhatsApp group discussion.

Gaskell had messaged to say the conversation was ‘utterly ridiculous’, to which a colleague referred to as GC had replied: ‘No need to get arsey Mark!!!!!’

When another colleague said: ‘Wow. What have I started? That was rhetorical, for the record’, Gaskell replied: ‘Do one.’ GC said: ‘Seriously no need for that Mark your [sic] bang out of order!!!!!’

Others joined the conversation to ask for people to ‘take a step back’ and comment that the conversation was inappropriate.

The judge said Gaskell ‘has a tendency to fly off the handle and make coruscating comments about people in person and in aggressive and disparaging correspondence’. He rejected that Gaskell had a long-term substantial medical condition that affected his day-to-day living activities and said the tribunal was not satisfied that the claimant was a disabled person within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010.

The judge added: ‘The claimant has not established, on the balance of probabilities, facts from which the tribunal could conclude that the respondent had discriminated against him and, if he had, the respondent has shown non-discriminatory reason for the claimant’s treatment. This was because of the claimant’s conduct.’