In person, assisted by his father Mr C Brown For the v Respondent — 2021

Mr Jack Brown worked for Tenpin Limited as a Customer Service Assistant at its Plymouth centre from 28 March 2015 until his summary dismissal for gross misconduct on 10 May 2019. The dismissal followed an incident on 4 May 2019 when he served two drinks to friends without taking payment. He accepted during the process that no payment had been taken and that he knew the correct wastage procedure but had not followed it. One of the drinks was entered on the wastage log; the other was not.

The tribunal found that the respondent carried out a full, fair and reasonable investigation. Ms Rogers reviewed CCTV and the transaction records, Mr Berry conducted the disciplinary hearing, and Ms Ewing dealt with the appeal as a full rehearing. The tribunal accepted that Mr Berry and Ms Ewing genuinely believed the claimant had committed gross misconduct, that belief was based on reasonable grounds, and dismissal for theft of drinks was within the band of reasonable responses open to a reasonable employer.

The tribunal rejected the claimant's procedural challenge based on not having his father present at the first disciplinary hearing. It found that the respondent's procedure allowed accompaniment by a fellow worker or trade union representative, that Mr Brown was accompanied by a colleague at the first hearing, and that no postponement was sought. When the claimant later produced medical evidence about epilepsy and distress, Ms Ewing allowed his father to attend the appeal hearing. The tribunal also rejected the allegation of inconsistent treatment involving Jessica Berry, finding no evidence that she had committed the same misconduct or that the respondent had treated comparable cases differently.