I usually write about upbeat, countryside matters but this blog post is different. My partner, who is the Conservationist, Naturalist, Raptor Specialist and all-round lovely man, Nigel Middleton, was made redundant from Sculthorpe Moor Nature Reserve which he co-founded with the film-maker David Cobham over 21 years ago and built up from scratch, alongside a fabulous, passionate and loyal group of volunteers. So far so miserable. However a judge ruled this week that he was, in fact, made redundant illegally – an ‘unfair dismissal’ – and this is the story:
PERSONNEL
Nigel Middleton – Naturalist, Raptor Specialist, Conservation Officer and with the late David Cobham, Founder of Sculthorpe Moor Nature Reserve
Dr Andrew McCulloch (https://www.socialworkengland.org.uk/news/introducing-dr-andrew-mcculloch-chair-of-the-board/)– Chairman of the Hawk and Owl Trust (https://www.hawkandowltrust.org ) also Chairman of Social Work England
Adrian Blumfield – CEO of the Hawk and Owl Trust
After a hearing earlier in the summer, Nigel Middleton, Raptor Specialist, Conservations Officer and, alongside the late David Cobham (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Cobham) Founder of Sculthorpe Moor Nature Reserve, has been successful in his unfair dismissal case against The Hawk and Owl Trust Ltd and Mr Adrian Blumfield. Mr Middleton had been an employee of the Hawk and Owl Trust for over 21 years and, as his employers had to admit in court, an exemplary employee.
Background
Mr Middleton had grown concerned about the way Mr Blumfield was managing Sculthorpe Moor Nature Reserve and had approached Dr Andrew McCulloch, the Chairman of the Hawk and Owl Trust who own the Reserve, to voice his concerns. Dr McCulloch is also the Chair of Social Work England and, as he wrote in his witness statement, has “years of experience in the Civil Service achieving the grade of Deputy Director, followed by eleven years’ experience as Chief Executive of a larger nationally well known charity… (and) that he had over 40 years of experience on Boards and Committees.” Mr Middleton hoped that Dr McCulloch would hear his concerns and those of other employees, members of the charity and local people which he sent on to him. Despite asking for these disclosures to remain private, Judge Warren states in that “ we (the Tribunal) glean that it seems Dr McCulloch must have in some way, informed Mr Blumfield that Mr Middleton had raised with him matters that would need to be discussed. Dr McCulloch denied this in cross examination. We did not find his denial convincing. The timing of Mr Blumfield’s actions are a remarkable coincidence. We conclude that Dr McCulloch must have made Mr Blumfield aware that Mr Middleton had raised matters about him.”
There then followed a catalogue of persecution.
‘People can be a pain in the arse’
February 2023, and a few days after major surgery, Mr Middleton received a letter from Adrian Blumfield, inviting him to discuss the future of his employment, the timing of which Judge Warren wrote, ‘was crass’. A formal grievance was raised by Mr Middleton which was to be heard by Peter Lawrence of Human Capital Department (https://www.humancapitaldept.com) whose own advertising states that, “People can be a pain in the arse”. (see below!)
Before he had even heard Mr Middleton’s grievance, Mr Lawrence wrote to Mr Blumfield and Dr McCulloch that “It might be better if I were to deliver the decision on Friday am to show that it has been considered carefully.” Judge Warren states that “The foregoing has led us to conclude that a campaign against Mr Middleton was launched by Mr Blumfield because he came to learn that Mr Middleton had raised concerns about him.
It was clear that Mr Blumfield was aiming to ultimately remove Mr Middleton from the business.
Dr McCulloch had also formed the view, influenced by Mr Blumfield, that Mr Middleton must go. He wrote of needing to get the Board, “behind the direction of travel”.
‘Smelling a rat’
In an email about the grievance procedure from Mr Lawrence to Mr Blumfield, and then sent to Dr McCulloch to join the conversation, it speaks of Mr Middleton potentially, “smelling a rat”. Judge M Warren states that “Mr Blumfield and Dr McCulloch told (the tribunal) in evidence that they were unable to explain what the, “rat” was that Mr Middleton might smell.”
Mr Middleton’s grievance was not upheld, and Judge Warren states that, “the letter inviting Mr Middleton to discuss his employment future whilst he was recovering from an operation, as not warranting an apology, is surprising, wrong and indicative of the Respondent’s mindset.”
Adrian Blumfield then invited Mr Middleton to attend a Disciplinary Hearing – without having carried out any form of investigation. During the Tribunal, Mr Blumfield admitted that not one of the disciplinary charges were deemed ‘gross misconduct’ as he had told the Trustees. Mr Middleton had asked that the Disciplinary Hearing be postponed for seven days as he was unwell, but Mr Blumfield would not do this, a refusal which the tribunal decided was unfair. Mr Middleton was told that was that the Hearing would go ahead without him. He heard nothing for weeks until he was told that the process had not gone ahead – again deemed unfair by the Tribunal.
‘Spurious’
Adrian Blumfield next sent a letter to Mr Middleton, informing him he was at risk of redundancy, a claim which the tribunal decided was ‘spurious’. As he was on pre-booked leave, which Mr Blumfield was aware of, Mr Middleton could not attend the short consultation period and could not discuss this anyway as, his solicitor pointed out to Mr Blumfield, he was still under a Disciplinary charge. The tribunal then notes that, ‘Informing Mr Middleton that he was no longer subject to disciplinary action and then 20 minutes later, informing him that he was dismissed with immediate effect, because he was redundant, was unfair.’
‘Remarkable’ late disclosures
The tribunal notes that, ‘During the course of the hearing there was further disclosure from the Respondent, some of it quite remarkable:-
“We were provided with two further versions of a document entitled, “The Business Case for Changes to Staff Structure and Conditions of Employment”, one of which had at the foot, “May 2023 (final)”.
Originally at paragraph 117 of his witness statement, as signed by Mr Blumfield on 5 February 2025 and as exchanged, he purported to assert that this document represented the situation as presented to the Board of Trustees at a Board Meeting in December 2022. At the outset of his evidence, Mr Blumfield agreed that paragraphs 117 and 118 of his witness statement should be deleted. His evidence was that this was a document that had changed from time to time and that the version he produced to the Respondent’s solicitors for disclosure was the latest version, he said it had been rewritten a number of times and he had misread it. He said that he had made a mistake. We did not find that a credible explanation.
‘A woeful tale of unfairness in process’ and ‘A sham’
The Tribunal concludes, ‘In the Tribunal’s judgement, redundancy as a purported reason for dismissal was nothing more than a sham.
The reason for Mr Middleton’s dismissal was that he had complained about Mr Blumfield’s management style.
The procedure followed by the Respondent in dismissing Mr Middleton was a woeful tale of unfairness in process.
Support
Mr Middleton was supported each day in court by many ex-volunteers and ex members of staff from the Hawk and Owl Trust, many of whom Mr Blumfield had banned from entering Sculthorpe Moor Nature Reserve. These has been documented in the local press:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-66304629
https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/23679174.sculthorpe-moor-nature-reserve-protests-hawk-owl-trust/
https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/23699478.sculthorpe-moor-reserve-volunteers-banned-protest/
So there we are. We have lived under the most rotten strain but friends and our love of outdoors has kept us going. However mad these past few years have been, we would stick on the walking boots and get outdoors. Nature helped up and now, nature will heal us.
Norfolk Notes 