In the case of Mr MW v The Governing Body of Cardinal Newman Catholic School Mr MW, an autistic teacher, was awarded £850,000 in compensation after being unfairly dismissed from his role as head of maths at Cardinal Newman Catholic School in Brighton. Mr MW, diagnosed with autism in 2017, was known to become fixated on certain issues, leading to multiple complaints at work. Despite his love for teaching, his grievances were seen by the school’s leadership as taking up too much time, and after several disputes, Mr MW was eventually suspended. He was offered a settlement and later a demotion, both of which he reluctantly accepted under protest, leading to further tension with his bosses.
Mr MW’s troubles with the school began in 2015 when he supported a colleague in a tribunal case. Shortly after, Mr MW found himself the target of what he believed were deliberate efforts to undermine him. He raised grievances about perceived bullying and felt that his involvement in the previous tribunal played a role in how he was treated. Despite his complaints, the school did not initially uphold them, and tensions escalated. In 2017, around the time of his autism diagnosis, Mr MW met with the chair of governors as the headteacher claimed he could no longer work with him.
The school’s leadership grew increasingly frustrated with Mr MW, citing his constant grievances and subject access requests as distractions from the broader needs of the school. They offered a financial settlement to end the working relationship, but Mr MW refused, leading to his suspension while the school investigated the breakdown of relationships. During this period, Mr MW expressed that despite his complaints, he was committed to the truth and loved his job. He acknowledged that his autism contributed to his fixation on certain issues and his persistence in pursuing them.
In 2018, after another grievance, the school implemented recommendations from the National Autistic Society to help Mr MW return to work. However, the new role offered to him—a “Head
Performance Coach”—was seen by Mr MW as a demotion, sparking further grievances. Although he agreed to take the position under protest, the conditions of his return frustrated the school, and he was ultimately dismissed. Mr MW sued for unfair dismissal, victimization, and disability discrimination, all of which were upheld by the tribunal.
The tribunal found that the school failed to account for Mr MW’s autism in their decision-making process, particularly how his behaviour was impacted by the condition. Judge Antony Hyams-Parish ruled that Mr MW’s dismissal was unfair and disproportionate, awarding him £850,000 for loss of earnings, injury to feelings, and pension loss. The school has until September 27 to make the payment.
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
