- MR N O’BRIEN FOR THE v Respondent — 2022

Mr M Locke brought a single claim of unfair dismissal against Wessex Auto Centres Ltd. The tribunal, sitting alone before Employment Judge Cadney, accepted that the respondent dismissed him because it believed he had committed misconduct arising from the incidents on 30 November and 2 December 2021, the transfer of £10,000 from the company bank account to his personal account, and the removal of signwriting and graphics from the company van. The tribunal rejected the claimant’s case that the dismissal was really part of a wider conspiracy to remove him from the company, finding instead that the later disciplinary steps flowed from his own conduct.

Applying the misconduct dismissal framework under s.98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the Burchell questions, the tribunal found that the investigation was reasonable, that the respondent’s conclusions were reasonable, and that dismissal was a reasonable sanction. It noted that the claimant had provided a detailed written account, that there was little factual dispute aside from the force of the blows alleged on 30 November 2021, and that he did not dispute damaging the laptop, transferring the £10,000, or removing the van graphics. The tribunal also recorded that the claimant did not attend the final disciplinary meeting and that his appeal was out of time, but considered those procedural points to have caused minimal prejudice.

The tribunal held that the claimant’s argument that the incidents were private family matters did not take the conduct outside the employment relationship, because the conduct occurred on company premises, involved other employees or directors, and concerned company property and funds. It therefore dismissed the unfair dismissal claim. Because the claim failed on the primary misconduct basis, the tribunal did not need to consider the alternative submission that dismissal was fair for some other substantial reason.