Mrs L Lewis v Kings Monkton School Limited and 1 other — 2023

The Claimant was a PE teacher and Head of Faculty who was dismissed after an off-site games lesson on 28 February 2022. The tribunal found that an 8-year-old pupil with a medical care plan did not have his medical bag with him, and that the Claimant authorised the use of another pupil's inhaler when the child became distressed. It accepted that the Claimant had generalised anxiety disorder and that the Respondents knew of that disability, but the central factual dispute was whether the dismissal and related comments were driven by misconduct or by disability.

On unfair dismissal, the tribunal held that the reason for dismissal was conduct within s.98(2)(b) ERA 1996 and that the dismissal was fair under s.98(4). Applying the Burchell approach, it found that the Respondent genuinely believed the misconduct allegations, had reasonable grounds for that belief, and carried out a reasonable investigation. It considered that the child's care plan made clear that the medical bag had to accompany the child, that the Claimant was in overall charge of the off-site lesson, and that authorising use of another pupil's inhaler without parental consent or medical guidance was a serious matter. It also found no material procedural unfairness in the investigation, disciplinary, or appeal stages.

The tribunal rejected the wrongful dismissal claim because the conduct found amounted to gross misconduct, so summary dismissal without notice was justified. It also dismissed the direct disability discrimination claim, the discrimination arising from disability claim under s.15 EqA 2010, the reasonable adjustments claim under ss.20-21 EqA 2010, and the harassment claim under s.26 EqA 2010. It found that Mrs Norton's disciplinary-hearing question, recorded as asking whether the Claimant was 'ok in your role', was not a disability-based remark or unwanted conduct, and that the Claimant was not placed at a substantial disadvantage in the disciplinary or appeal process. The appeal, heard by Mr Gatenby and concluded on 29 June 2022, upheld the dismissal; no remedy was awarded because all claims failed.