Elizabeth Chand v EE Limited Heard: by CVP in Birmingham — 2022

Elizabeth Chand was dismissed by EE Limited on 14 November 2022 for gross misconduct. The tribunal recorded four allegations: a June 2022 credit check issue, an August 2022 incident involving two BANs for the same customer, a September 2022 refer-code/ID scanning incident, and an October 2022 ID check issue. The claimant relied on stress, caring responsibilities for her parents, and a previously good disciplinary record as mitigation. The tribunal accepted that she had been under significant stress and that the respondent had not treated that mitigation well in relation to three of the allegations.

Applying section 98 ERA 1996 and the Burchell line of authority, the tribunal held that Mr Palmer's view of the first, third and fourth allegations was tainted by an assumption that the claimant had acted fraudulently, and that his analysis of her mitigation was flawed. It found that those three allegations were treated too categorically as fraud or deliberate misconduct, and that, taken alone, the dismissal would have been unfair in relation to those matters.

The tribunal nevertheless upheld the dismissal because it found the August 2022 allegation sufficiently serious on its own. It accepted that the claimant had created two BANs for the same customer during one transaction, that the customer had later failed to pay, and that the explanation she gave was inadequate. Although it did not find deliberate fraud, it held that this conduct was an egregious breach of the customer connections policy and that dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses.

The appeal was found to be procedurally robust, and the tribunal rejected the argument that advertising the claimant's job before the written dismissal confirmation made the process unfair. Because the dismissal was held fair, the wrongful dismissal claim also failed and the tribunal held there had been no breach of contract and no entitlement to notice pay.