Mr A Eaton First v TJX Europe Limited Heard — 2022

Mr Eaton was employed by TJX Europe Limited as Health and Safety Manager at its Walsall distribution site. The dismissal arose from events on 5 March 2021, when he used a DHL tug and trailer unit to move stock after obtaining the key from the DHL office and speaking to DHL employee SG. The tribunal recorded that the claimant accepted he drove the DHL vehicle, had not been instructed to do so directly, and had also made some use of the respondent's own vehicles without completing the relevant checks or defect-reporting processes.

The respondent investigated from 8 March 2021 onwards, suspended the claimant, and later proceeded to a disciplinary hearing on five allegations concerning use of the DHL tug and trailer, pre-use checks, failure to report potential defects through the VOR process, failure to wear appropriate PPE, and alleged access-control issues. The tribunal noted that allegation 5 was not proved, but Mr King found the other allegations largely proven, relied on the claimant's admissions, and concluded that the claimant's conduct exposed the business to safety risks. The claimant's appeal was heard by Mrs Dennis, who did not uphold it and found that, although the claimant had been acting to help the business, he should have followed the relevant policies and procedures.

The tribunal found the investigation was thorough and that Mr Hodgetts was entitled to act as investigator because he was not the decision-maker and had not directly instructed the claimant to use the DHL vehicle. Applying section 98 ERA 1996, the Burchell test, and the range of reasonable responses approach, it held that the respondent had shown conduct as the reason for dismissal, had a genuine belief on reasonable grounds after a reasonable investigation, and was entitled to conclude that summary dismissal was justified. The tribunal also rejected the claimant's complaints about disclosure of CCTV footage and the appeal notes, and found there was no evidence of inconsistent treatment.

The wrongful dismissal complaint was dismissed as well. The tribunal held that the claimant's conduct was a fundamental breach of contract and that the respondent was entitled to dismiss him without notice.