Police sergeant who tried to sue the Met Police as a result of his boss known as him a ‘numpty’ is ordered to pay £12,000
A long-serving police sergeant who unsuccessfully sued the Met Police for discrimination after his boss called him a ‘numpty’ has been ordered to pay £12,000.
Sonny Kalar, who was with the Met Police for 30 years, said he was offended when Chief Inspector Marlise Davies twice called him ‘numpty’.
But an employment judge found that CI Davies used it in a ‘lighthearted manner’ and that it does not amount to discrimination.
The remark – which usually means silly or foolish – cannot be discriminatory because it does not have any ‘racial or disability connotations’, the tribunal found.
Mr Kalar brought a series of claims, including race discrimination and harassment, disability discrimination and harassment, victimisation, and whistle-blowing detriment.
He made wide-ranging allegations against senior officers within the Met, claiming there was a ‘collective witch hunt’ against him.
In total, he made a staggering 271 individual allegations. All of them were dismissed.
Now, he has been ordered by London Central Employment Tribunal to pay the Met £12,000 to cover its legal costs.
Sonny Kalar said he was offended when Chief Inspector Marlise Davies twice called him a ‘numpty’. In total, Mr Kalar made a staggering 271 individual allegations. All of them were dismissed
The tribunal ruled Mr Kalar’s huge swathe of claims ‘had no reasonable prospect of success’ and said his conduct in bringing them was ‘unreasonable’.
Employment Judge Richard Nicolle said: ‘Whilst we do not draw a precise line of demarcation between no reasonable prospect of success and unreasonable conduct of the proceedings we consider both limbs to be applicable.
‘We consider that the pursuit of 271 allegations, many of them straddling the same incidents, and what we described as a scattergun approach, not only involved the continuing pursuit of claims with no reasonable prospect of success but also the unreasonable conduct of the proceedings.
‘We consider that [Mr Kalar] progressively sought to label every minor workplace issue as being attributable to discrimination, protected disclosures, protected acts and disability etc in a disproportionate and unreasonable fashion.
‘We consider this constituted unreasonable conduct.’
Mr Kalar joined the Met in June 1993 and retired in June 2023.
One of his allegations was that CI Davies, Chief Inspector in the SO15 Borders Counter Terrorism Command, discriminated against him by calling him a ‘numpty’.
The tribunal heard CI Davies had called Mr Kalar while he was on sick leave recovering from a knee operation, and during the conversation used the phrase ‘living the dream’.
‘[Mr Kalar] referred to a telephone conversation of approximately one hour on July 15 2022,’ the tribunal heard.
‘He recorded that he took exception to her ‘living the dream’ comment, which he says was aimed at him and that it was not a dream but a nightmare due to suffering with his disabilities and health issues.
‘CI Davies says that the comment was not made in relation to [Mr Kalar] but due to the condition of the building at [St Pancras International], with water running down the walls.
‘[Mr Kalar] then referred to her twice having called him ‘numpty’.
‘CI Davies accepts using the term, once not twice, but said that it was used as an affectionate term as in don’t be so silly rather than in a disparaging manner.
‘Nevertheless, she apologised to [Mr Kalar].’
Judge Nicolle said: ‘We accept CI Davies’ evidence that the comment was made during her call with [Mr Kalar] on 15 July 2022 in a lighthearted manner.
‘We reject his assertion that it had anything to do with his [whistle-blowing].
‘We do not consider that the term ‘numpty’ has any racial or disability connotations and in the context that it was used, in what we considered to be a lighthearted manner, not one which was capable of constituting harassment when looked at objectively.
‘We acknowledge [Mr Kalar] may subjectively have perceived the comment to be directed at him and to be disparaging but consider it relates to his heightened sensitivity rather than how the comments would be objectively viewed.
‘We take account of the fact that CI Davies in her use of language… uses informal, arguably self-deprecating and humorous language.
‘We do not consider given the context in which these comments were made, that they were intended, or could reasonably be construed, as constituting harassment.’
The former police sergeant has been ordered by London Central Employment Tribunal to pay the Met £12,000 to cover its legal costs
Mr Kalar also alleged he was discriminated against over different postings, including one transfer to Heathrow Terminal 2, which he said was a ‘punishment post’.
He alleged he was being ‘spied on’ and also claimed one colleague was a ‘deeply racist officer’.
The tribunal report said: ‘He says that he has been continuously discriminated against from the time he was removed from [Ports Duty Supervisor] in 2017.
‘He contends that there have been a series of directly connected and continuing acts as part of a lengthy campaign… He refers to a collective witch hunt.
‘[Mr Kalar]… referred to an overarching culture of institutional racism, misogyny and disablism.’
Judge Nicolle said Mr Kalar’s case was a ‘scatter gun approach’ because he ‘labelled virtually every allegation as constituting harassment on account of both race and disability’.
Judge Nicolle said ‘many of his allegations are inherently inconsistent’ and said from 2020 there was ‘increasing evidence that he was focussing on creating potential evidence for a likely legal claim’.
