The Hawk & Owl Trust, and its Chief Operations Director, Adrian Blumfield, have been slammed by an employment tribunal about the unfair dismissal of long-term employee, Nigel Middleton.

Nigel, a well-respected naturalist, raptor specialist and the now former Conservation Officer at the Hawk & Owl Trust (HOT), was amongst other things responsible for wardening the HOT’s Sculthorpe Moor Nature Reserve in Norfolk, a reserve he founded with the late David Cobham and which opened to the public in 2003.

On 5th May 2023, Nigel received a letter from the HOT informing him that he’d been dismissed with immediate effect as he’d been made redundant.

Nigel Middleton (Photo supplied)

Blog readers may recall a ‘revolt’ against the Hawk & Owl Trust in July 2023 by disgruntled life members and volunteers of the HOT, who held a peaceful protest at the HOT HQ (see here and here) and made a formal complaint to the Charity Commission about what they believed was “poor management” of the organisation, following Nigel’s dismissal and the unusual departure of other staff.

The Charity Commission later stated:

“We carefully considered concerns raised with us about the governance of The Hawk and Owl Trust. Based on the information provided, we determined that there is no regulatory role for us at this time“.

The Hawk & Owl Trust’s Chief Operations Director Adrian Blumfield was quoted in the press at the time:

“We understand that a small number of people previously connected with the charity are resistant to the positive progress and changes that have been made.

“Any criticism of the charity is completely unwarranted, misplaced and risks undermining the work being undertaken“.

Some HOT volunteers later said they’d been banned from the HOT’s Sculthorpe Moor Reserve after staging the protest.

Nigel lodged legal proceedings for unfair dismissal against the Hawk & Owl Trust and Adrian Blumfield on 3 August 2023 and a six-day tribunal hearing took place in June/July 2025 before an employment judge, M. Warren. Nigel was supported during each day of the hearing by many of the ex-volunteers and ex-members of staff that Adrian Blumfield had banned from Sculthorpe Moor Nature Reserve.

A reserved judgement was handed down on 12 August 2025 by Judge Warren who stated:

“There was no potentially fair reason for dismissal and therefore Mr Middleton’s complaint of unfair dismissal succeeds. Had there been a potentially fair reason, the procedural failings set out above would inevitably have led to a conclusion that the dismissal was unfair in any event“.

The issue of compensation for Nigel will be determined at a future date.

Here is some background detail about the whole sorry mess:

The tribunal heard that Nigel had grown concerned about the way Adrian Blumfield was managing Sculthorpe Moor Nature Reserve and in November 2022 had approached Dr Andrew McCulloch, the Chair of the Hawk and Owl Trust, to voice his concerns.

Dr McCulloch is also the Chair of ‘Social Work England’ and, as he wrote in his witness statement to the tribunal, 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.”  

Nigel had hoped that Dr McCulloch would hear his concerns and those of other HOT employees, members and local people, which Nigel had sent on to him.

Despite asking for these disclosures to remain private, Judge Warren states in his tribunal ruling:

“ 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 [subsequent] actions are a remarkable coincidence. We conclude that Dr McCulloch must have made Mr Blumfield aware that Mr Middleton had raised matters about him.”

Nigel argues that shortly afterwards he was subjected to a ‘catalogue of persecution’.

‘People can be a pain in the arse’

In February 2023, and a few days after undergoing major surgery, Nigel 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 Nigel which was to be heard by Peter Lawrence of Human Capital Department, the HOT’s human resource advisor whose own advertising states that, ‘People can be a pain in the arse‘. 

Human Capital Department advert for business services

Before he had even held Nigel’s grievance hearing, Mr Lawrence wrote to Adrian Blumfield and Dr McCulloch as follows:

“It might be better if I were to deliver the decision on Friday am to show that it has been considered carefully.”  

Judge Warren’s tribunal finding 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 Adrian Blumfield, and then sent to Dr McCulloch, it speaks of Nigel potentially “smelling a rat”.  Judge Warren stated 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.”  

Nigel’s grievance against the HOT about the timing of Adrian Blumfield’s letter inviting him to discuss his employment future was not upheld by Ian Lawrence, and although Mr Lawrence admitted that in hindsight, the timing was “ill-timed“, he did not consider that it warranted an apology as Nigel had requested.

However, in the tribunal finding, Judge Warren states:

“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.”

Shortly after the grievance hearing, Adrian Blumfield invited Nigel to attend a disciplinary hearing about alleged gross misconduct; Blumfield had written a report alleging four counts but had not met with Nigel or any other member of staff during the preparation of the report. The following day, Nigel received a letter advising him that he’d been suspended.

During the tribunal, Blumfield admitted that not one of the purported disciplinary charges were deemed ‘gross misconduct’ as he had apparently told the HOT Trustees.

Nigel had asked that the disciplinary hearing be postponed for seven days as he was unwell, but this request was refused; a refusal which the tribunal decided was unfair.

Nigel had been told that the disciplinary hearing would go ahead without him. He heard nothing for weeks until he was later told that the process had not gone ahead – again deemed unfair by the tribunal.

‘Spurious’

The following month, Adrian Blumfield sent a letter to Nigel informing him he was at risk of redundancy, a claim which the tribunal decided was ‘spurious’, and that a 7-day redundancy consultation process was underway.

At this point, Nigel was still suspended from work and the disciplinary process was pending. 

On 4 May 2023, solicitors acting on behalf of Nigel emailed Mr Lawrence of Human Capital Department to explain that Nigel could not engage in meaningful consultation about redundancy until he was able to understand the arrangements for the ongoing disciplinary process. Further, she pointed out that Nigel was on annual leave until 12 May 2023 and would not engage in consultation during that period.

There followed correspondence in which it was suggested that Nigel was not on annual leave. His solicitor produced a screen shot of the HOT’s management system leave calendar showing that he was indeed on pre-arranged leave.

On 5 May 2023, Nigel received a letter informing him that notice he attend a disciplinary hearing was withdrawn. Twenty minutes later, he received a letter informing him that he was dismissed with immediate effect, saying that he had refused to attend a meeting, would not discuss matters with them and they therefore had no alternative but to make his position redundant.  

The tribunal finding 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.“

‘A woeful tale of unfairness in process’ and ‘a sham’

The written judgement from Judge Warren concludes:

“In the Tribunal’s judgement, redundancy as a purported reason for dismissal was nothing more than a sham”

and

“The reason for Mr Middleton’s dismissal was that he had complained about Mr Blumfield’s management style“

and

“The procedure followed by the Respondent [Hawk & Owl Trust] in dismissing Mr Middleton was a woeful tale of unfairness in process“.

And just in case anyone still doubts the petty and vindictive behaviour of the HOT ‘leadership’…

On 23 May 2023, solicitors acting on instructions from Adrian Blumfield wrote to Nigel’s daughter. She had grazed cattle on the Trust’s land since 2005 – two steers which were regarded as family pets. The solicitor’s letter suggested that these animals were on the Trust’s property without knowledge or permission and demanded that they remove them within ten days. They warned that if they did not comply, County Court proceedings would be issued for trespass, resulting in a judgement that would be recorded on the register for Orders, Judgements and Fines.

What a bloody shame. When I was taking my first tentative steps in to the world of raptor research and conservation, many years ago, the Hawk & Owl Trust was widely admired as one of the few UK-based charities dedicated to birds of prey and owls.

Its former director, Colin Shawyer, was one of those guys whose expertise was unrivalled and in demand and yet he still found the time to answer my letters about identifying prey remains I’d found inside pellets and he encouraged me to get involved with a Barn Owl monitoring project being run by Sue and Richard Dewar on behalf of the HOT. Those early field experiences and opportunities were instrumental to my career choice.

It’s hard to imagine that level of support and encouragement being offered to someone under the current management regime.

Things started to fall apart for the HOT ten years ago in 2014/2015 when it decided, under the direction of then Chair Philip Merricks, to get into bed with the grouse shooting industry and support the Hen Harrier Brood Meddling sham.

That decision, and the HOT’s subsequent behaviour, cost the HOT dearly. It lost its president (Chris Packham) and it lost the support and respect of many in the conservation world.

The banning of many loyal volunteers and members from the HOT’s Sculthorpe Moor Nature Reserve in 2023, now followed by an employment tribunal’s damning conclusion about the HOT’s treatment of an outstanding and long-serving member of staff, leave the reputation of the HOT in the gutter.

Nigel has been vindicated and he’s better off being as far away as possible from this toxic, dysfunctional outfit. I wish him all the best in his future ventures.