Oxford University has lost a court battle against a former scientist who claims he was unfairly dismissed.

Dr Amin Moghaddam left the institution in March 2019 after 16 years as he failed to secure more funding and his fixed-term contract ended.

The 54-year-old, originally from Iran, has now won his appeal against a tribunal ruling two years ago that threw out his unfair dismissal claim against the university.

After ruling that the original hearing in 2022 made flawed findings, the Employment Appeals Tribunal’s decision has confirmed a fresh employment tribunal will now be heard.

READ MORE: Westgate shop slapped with back-to-back ZERO hygiene ratings

Dr Amin Moghaddam joined the University of Oxford in 2003.Dr Amin Moghaddam joined the University of Oxford in 2003. (Image: LinkedIn)

This follows after Dr Moghaddam’s pursuit of a bitter row with former colleague Quentin Sattentau over who should get credit for groundbreaking nut allergies research.

The research scientist, who joined Oxford University in 2003, claimed that the professor had been unfairly named as the lead author of a landmark paper now 10 years ago.

Suggesting that dry roasted peanuts are more likely to trigger an allergic reaction than raw peanuts, 2014’s paper was seen as ground-breaking.

The two research medics had worked closely alongside each other in the same lab, but their relationship 'unravelled' after

Dr Moghaddam also accused his supervisor of plagiarism and taking credit for a later 2018 review paper as well as the 2014 landmark research.

He sued the University of Oxford at the Reading Employment Tribunal, as well as Prof Sattentau and his chief supervisor, Prof Matthew Freeman, claiming he was unfairly dismissed.

READ MORE: Tributes pour in for ‘nice and lovely man’ after police find body in woods

The ruling saw Dr Amin Moghaddam win his appeal.The ruling saw Dr Amin Moghaddam win his appeal. (Image: Unsplash)

Prof Sattentau was accused of scientific misconduct but claims of unfair treatment by his boss were rejected by the ET.

The professor had been named as the 2014 paper’s lead author which led to Dr Moghaddam claiming this amounted to a breach of academic authorship guidelines.

In 2018, Prof Sattentau had produced a review manuscript and this saw him billed as the sole senior author.

Dr Moghaddam was named as 'third author,' despite claims that the piece was based on 2016 work of his own.

Judge Murray Shanks said: “Dr Moghaddam complained that the document was based on his work and that the professor was acting in breach of academic ethics and guilty of plagiarising his work.

“The professor said that he found Dr Moghaddam's correspondence on the topic to be a 'very personal attack,' involving 'hostile and abusive language' which made it incredibly difficult for them to continue working together.”

READ MORE: Person killed on train tracks on Oxfordshire railway route

Dr Moghaddam’s barrister, Jesse Crozier, argued that Prof Sattentau and his own boss had “deliberately failed to seek or secure funding to continue the claimant's employment”.

Judge Shanks made no findings on whether Dr Moghaddam's research work had concluded due to his row with Prof Sattentau and alleged “whistleblowing”.

He did say that the ET failed to properly grapple with the issue of whether the plagiarism claims triggered his downfall due to Prof Sattentau turning against him.

The judge also added that the ET failed to resolve the issue of Dr Moghaddam suffering “detriment because of whistleblowing, protected disclosures based on his allegations about Prof Sattentau stealing his work”.

Judge Shanks said: “The combination of the failure to make express findings on the detriments relied on and to consider whether the disclosures materially influenced them, and in particular to consider whether the breakdown in the relationship with Prof Sattentau was itself materially influenced by the disclosures or whether the manner of the disclosures...was the cause of any relevant detriment, mean in my view that this ground of appeal must be allowed and parts of the whistleblowing claim must be remitted for further consideration.”

READ MORE: Oxfordshire attacker punches Banbury man in the face

The University of Oxford.The University of Oxford. (Image: Unsplash)

Judge Shanks dismissed Dr Moghaddam’s appeal against the ET's finding that the university made “reasonable adjustments” to the depression he was suffering during his final months of work.

Help support trusted local news

Sign up for a digital subscription now: https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/subscribe/

As a digital subscriber you will get:

  • Unlimited access to the Oxford Mail website        
  • Advert-light access             
  • Reader rewards             
  • Full access to our app