A senior legal officer’s claims of widespread race discrimination against Peterborough City Council have been largely dismissed by an Employment Tribunal, though two specific complaints of race-related harassment were upheld.
The reserved judgment, issued by Employment Judge Tynan and tribunal members Ms S Jenkins and Ms M Harris, follows a lengthy hearing into the dismissal of Ms Rochelle Tapping, the council’s former director of legal and governance, who served from November 2022 until her dismissal in August 2023.
The case unfolded against a backdrop of significant challenges for Peterborough City Council.
In 2021, the government commissioned an external review of the council’s finances and governance, leading to the appointment of an improvement and assurance panel and recommendations for cultural and structural reforms.
Ms Tapping, described as “a breath of fresh air” during her recruitment, was the first black person to hold the statutory monitoring officer role at Peterborough and possibly the first black permanent member of the corporate leadership team in years.
Mandy Pullen, the council’s service director with responsibility for people & development services described Ms Tapping at tribunal as “a breath of fresh air” and “exactly what Peterborough needed.”
The claims
Ms Tapping alleged that her “cards were marked” from the outset, claiming she was subjected to a hostile and discriminatory environment orchestrated by senior council officers, particularly chief executive Matthew Gladstone. She cited 43 separate incidents or “detriments” as evidence of direct discrimination, harassment, and victimisation under the Equality Act 2010.
Wednesday 30 July 2025. Picture by Terry Harris.
Peterborough City Council dismisses £110,000 a year legal chief
The tribunal noted: “The claimant’s case is that her ‘cards were marked’ from the outset of her employment with the respondent, after Mr Gladstone and Ms Pullen were made aware that she was in dispute with her former employer, Birmingham City Council and was alleging that it had racially discriminated against her.”
Tribunal’s findings: most claims dismissed
After hearing evidence from 21 witnesses and reviewing thousands of pages of documents, the tribunal found that the majority of Ms Tapping’s complaints were not well-founded.
In respect of the dismissed claims, the tribunal found that Ms Tapping “has failed to establish the essential primary facts relied upon by her in support of her claim to have been subjected to unwanted conduct and detriment in respect of those matters.”
The panel concluded that while Ms Tapping genuinely believed she had been discriminated against, much of her perception was shaped by prior negative experiences and a tendency to misinterpret or misremember events.
“We are satisfied that the claimant genuinely believes that she was discriminated against even if, by her own account, she was minded to question Mr Gladstone’s integrity ‘in all situations’,” it found.
Two harassment complaints upheld
However, the tribunal did uphold two complaints of harassment related to race:
Friendship assumption
In February 2023, Mr Gladstone asked Ms Tapping and a new interim head of legal, Ms. Adesuwa Omoregie, both black women, if they were friends.
The tribunal ruling added: “We have concluded that on first being introduced to Ms Omoregie by the claimant in early February 2023, Mr Gladstone asked them whether they were friends. He intended to ask them whether they knew one another because they had previously worked together. … it seemed to both the claimant and Ms Omoregie that he was assuming that two black women in senior roles must know one another.”
‘Hero to zero’ in just 10 months for £110,000 a year Peterborough legal chief
This was corroborated by Ms Omoregie herself, who told the council’s investigator:
“Unusual I thought, that is all, I thought it a bit strange as to why he would think we would be friends,” said Ms Omoregie.
She added, reflecting on whether race played a role: “Oh, I guess, looking back to when we were asked if we were friends, I don’t know if it’s because he saw 2 black [people] sitting together that he assumed that we were friends talking together…. it was a bit unusual when asking if we were friends soon as I was introduced.”
The tribunal found: “We ultimately conclude that it was reasonable for her (Ms Tapping) to be offended by the comment because of the implicit suggestion, as she perceived it, that two black women in senior roles must know one another, alternatively that Ms Omoregie had not been recruited by the claimant entirely on merit.
“We therefore uphold the complaint notwithstanding the question was effectively a slip of the tongue and that it was never Mr Gladstone’s intention to cause offence.”
WhatsApp photo incident
On 11 April 2023, chief finance officer Cecilie Booth sent a photograph to a council leadership WhatsApp group that appeared to show a naked black woman (later clarified as a carnival performer in costume).
The tribunal said: “In our judgement that fact, combined with the picture’s focus on the black performer’s exposed buttocks, rather than for example her abilities (or otherwise) as a performer or dancer, lead us to conclude that the image can be said to relate to race and that it was ultimately reasonable for the claimant to feel that it created a degrading environment for her and black women in general.”
“For the avoidance of doubt, we are certain that Ms Booth did not set out to offend, on the contrary that it was intended as a light hearted communication with her colleagues back in the UK, as her further messages evidence.
“Nevertheless … we think it did offend her sense of what it is and what it takes to be a successful professional black woman, and for that reason we uphold the complaint.”
Witness perspective
Dr Jyoti Atri, former joint director of public health for Cambridgeshire County Council and Peterborough City Council, was a member of the corporate leadership team (CLT) during Ms Tapping’s tenure.
Ms Atri provided a witness statement in support of Ms Tapping.
The tribunal noted: “Ms Atri was interviewed in connection with a grievance raised by the claimant, including her recollection of a CLT meeting at which Ms Cecilie Booth, the city council’s chief finance officer was allegedly aggressive towards her and Ms Tapping.
Ms Atri’s evidence on Ms Booth’s behaviour.
Ms Atri described a specific incident. She referred to an occasion when Ms Booth was “absolutely going at another colleague, I tried to intervene, she had a go at me, jumped down my throat.”
When asked if she thought there was a racial element to how she was treated by Ms Booth, Ms Atri replied: “I think she is just a bully, she behaved like that to other people, other people also mentioned.”
Other witnesses commented on the broader environment and the impact of such.
Ms Elaine Redding, director of children’s services, said of Ms Booth’s behaviour in meetings: “There was certainly a tension. It was uncomfortable, didn’t need to be as assertive or in that tone. I did feel Rochelle just trying to do her job. Thought the tone and challenge was disproportionate.”
Ms Omoregie on Ms Booth’s style: “She was annoyed I would say. She raised her voice. “It was not directed towards me or Rochelle specifically, directed to all of us, she was irritated by everyone. She can be very direct.”
Dismissal and aftermath
Ms Tapping’s employment was terminated after she failed her probation period, following a recommendation by Mr Gladstone and endorsement by an independent panel and the full council.
The tribunal noted: “Mr Gladstone decided the claimant did not meet the standards needed for a director of legal and governance and that a further extended period of probation was unlikely to result in him making a different decision in terms of confirming the claimant’s appointment.”
The tribunal found that the decision was based on genuine concerns about performance, leadership, and team dynamics, not race or protected acts.
It added: “Mr Gladstone has satisfied us that the claimant’s race and her protected acts had nothing whatever to do with his decision that she had not passed her probation, which was instead firmly grounded in a genuine and reasonably held belief, shared by others, that she was not performing at the level required for the role.”
Lessons and reflections
While the tribunal dismissed most of Ms Tapping’s claims, it encouraged the council to reflect on inclusivity.
“We encourage the respondent to reflect critically as to what inclusivity means at Peterborough.”
Chief executive response to tribunal
Chief executive, Matt Gladstone, in a statement to CambsNews, said: “I am pleased that the tribunal’s thorough examination has found in our favour in relation to almost all of the allegations made against the council, including those that related to the claimant’s suspension and dismissal as the council’s monitoring officer.
“In respect of the two claims that were upheld, I am pleased that the tribunal found that the offence caused was never intended. However, we will reflect carefully on the lessons to be learned from this case.
“Recognising and valuing diversity is one of our core corporate values and one that I personally take very seriously. As an organisation, we will continue to promote a culture where everyone is treated equitably, regardless of race or any other protected characteristic.”
Public access
The full judgment is available online at the government’s Employment Tribunal decisions website.
“Judgments and reasons for the Judgments are published, in full, online at
www.gov.uk/employmenttribunal-decisions
Key Points:
- Most discrimination and victimisation claims dismissed.
- Two complaints of race-related harassment upheld.
- Tribunal found no evidence of a conspiracy or orchestrated campaign against Ms Tapping.
- Council encouraged to improve inclusivity and communication.
