Late MD of Isle of Sark Shipping was dismissed unfairly

Mr Garlick was fired in August 2017, after which he began proceedings against the company. He died in late October.

His son, Matthew, acting as a co-executor of his father’s estate, had continued with the action.

Yesterday, Isle of Sark Shipping did not contest the claim, leading to a summary decision by an employment tribunal that Mr Garlick was unfairly dismissed and an award of £20,180 being made.

Advocate Louise Hall represented Isle of Sark Shipping.

She said that while she appreciated that the applicant wished to call witnesses to give evidence, this would be a costly and time-consuming process, and she asked for it to be borne in mind that the company provided lifeline services to Sark and its resources were needed elsewhere.

She estimated that some three days and at least nine witnesses would be necessary to go over all the allegations.

But for evidence to be heard, the two parties would need to be in dispute. Since IOSS had said it would not contest the matter, there could not be said to be any dispute.

‘The company’s case is that it can be dealt with under the information already adduced,’ she said.

Mr Garlick’s brother, Stephen, represented Matthew Garlick and presented two statements to the hearing, in which he said that he was disappointed by the ruling of the panel not to hear evidence and he considered its reasoning to be flawed.

There was still a dispute between the applicant and Isle of Sark Shipping, and this was evidenced by its denial of the allegations in Mr Garlick’s initial submission.

Panel chairman Peter Woodward said that he and its two members, Joanne De Garis and Roger Brookfield, were satisfied that the information they had received from the applicant and its legal advisor gave them enough information on which to make a finding of unfair dismissal, without the need for witnesses to be called.

Matthew Garlick issued a statement after the hearing in which he said it was a good day for his father’s memory and reputation.

‘The finding of the employment tribunal today proves beyond doubt that he was treated unfairly and IOSS were wrong to dismiss him.’

But he said he was disappointed that the panel had not allowed any evidence in defence of his father’s conduct to be presented.

‘The fact that IOSS were not prepared to defend themselves should send a signal to everyone about the company and its leadership,’ he said.

‘My father endured enormous stress and pressure whilst at IOSS, stress the family feel contributed to his untimely death.’

Stephen Garlick said that he had been ‘extremely shocked’ when preparing the case for his brother.

‘The evidence he gathered regarding the conduct of the directors and shareholders of IOSS paints a very poor example of corporate governance,’ he said.

His brother had been sacked after a secret investigation by an advocate, who did not hear evidence from him, and ignored complaints made by him about other directors.

There followed a secret meeting of Chief Pleas which ended with Mr Garlick’s dismissal.

‘This illustrates the opaque, secretive and troublesome organisational culture Paul was trying to change,’ he said.

He thanked Advocate Tom Crawfourd for helping prepare the case and the Institute of Gas Engineers and Managers Benevolent Fund who helped with legal expenses.

Paul Garlick had been managing director of Guernsey Gas.