I'm not surprised. If it's true that they offered him a reduced contract, risking a constructive dismissal, to then dismiss him on grounds of gross misconduct when he allegedly refuses it (so they've effectively dismissed him for refusing a lesser contract) appears from the outside some serious mis-management. Regardless if the act he may have committed (which none of us really know, speculation isn't fact), the motives for dismissal seemingly weren't aligned to the reason.

RA: Swale doesn't know any more than you and is regularly factually wrong throughout his posts on the subject, I wouldn't waste your time to his ego boasting.

Whatever the facts of the case, I'm pleased for Richard on a personal level.