Claimant v Ruska v Cross Street Garage — 2022

Mr V Ruska brought a claim of unfair dismissal against Cross Street Garage. The tribunal held that the respondent genuinely believed the claimant had behaved as alleged, had reasonable grounds for that belief, and that the claimant did in fact behave as alleged. It further found that the conduct amounted to gross misconduct and that summary dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses open to the respondent.

The dismissal was nevertheless unfair because the respondent did not carry out a reasonable investigation and did not carry out a fair and reasonable disciplinary procedure. The tribunal therefore characterised the dismissal as procedurally unfair.

The tribunal found that the claimant would still have been dismissed on the same date if a correct and fair procedure had been followed. It reduced both the basic award and the compensatory award by 100% under section 122(2) and section 123(6) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 because the claimant was entirely responsible for his own dismissal and suffered no loss from the procedural unfairness. No monetary award resulted.