VETERAN broadcaster Laurie Mayer and the BBC will have to wait a few weeks to find out the outcome of their clash of claim and counter-claim at an Ashford Employment Tribunal.

Judgement was reserved at the end of the three-and-a-half day hearing which had heard allegations by newsreader Mr Mayer of bullying and harassment of staff in the BBC studios in Tunbridge Wells.

Mr Mayer claimed he was unfairly dismissed for “blowing the whistle” on the alleged “atmosphere of intimidation".

He walked out of the studio on June 26 last year, 10 minutes before he was due to go on air to present South East Today, because he was “too upset” to continue after being blamed for “terrible” viewing figures.

Grahame Davis, the tribunal chairman, said there were a number of legal issues to sort out and he expected a decision within three to four weeks.

When Mr Mayer emerged from Tribunal Room 3 with his wife Jill, and son Nick, he said: “I really want to pay tribute to the courage of those people who came forward.”

The final few hours of a case that coincided with the questioning of BBC staff at the Hutton inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly, was dominated by the summing-up by respective counsel for the BBC and Mr Mayer.

Damian Brown, for Mr Mayer, said the BBC had tried to show that Mr Mayer “didn’t fit in with the dumbing-down of regional news.”

He referred to two examples given by programme editor Rod Beards who revealed that a presenter who took over after Mr Mayer’s departure had had his chest hair waxed for charity. Another imitated a Radio One DJ hosting the Eurovision Song Contest.

“They wanted people to have their chest hair waxed while Mr Mayer wanted to get on with reading the news,” Mr Brown said.

Gerard Clarke, for the BBC, said it was wrong of Mr Mayer to sell his story about alleged incidents at the Tunbridge Wells studio to the Mail on Sunday, a newspaper known to be “hostile” to the BBC.

Mr Mayer took his story to the newspaper when BBC director-general Greg Dyke did not reply promptly to a letter outlining his concerns .

Mr Clarke said the article was “exaggerated” and Mr Mayer had been unable to “back up” what he said in the article for which he was paid £1,500.

It was not a reasonable way to make a disclosure and was “entirely premature” because Mr Mayer had only given one working day to the director-general to respond.

He added that Mr Mayer had effectively dismissed himself by walking out of the studio on June 26.