Mr S Westney v Utilities Academy Limited (in administration) Determined on the papers at: Leeds — 2019

Mr S Westney brought a sole claim of unfair dismissal arising from his dismissal by Utilities Academy Limited (in administration). The tribunal found that the respondent’s reason for dismissal was its belief that he had spent around £550-£600 from the scrap metal cash tin without authorisation to fund a staff night out. It accepted that the allegation was genuinely raised, investigated and put to the claimant, and that the claimant had also accepted that authorisation would have been required.

The tribunal rejected the claimant’s case that the dismissal decision was really because he had refused to falsify documents. It found no sufficient link between that allegation and the decision-makers, and said the dismissal letters showed a reasoned decision based on the respondent’s view of the claimant’s conduct in relation to the cash tin. It also found that the respondent reasonably treated the claimant’s account as problematic, including because he did not give a clear and persuasive explanation for how the night out had been funded and could not evidence the claimed private funding.

On procedure, the tribunal held that the process was fair. The claimant had been invited to investigation and disciplinary meetings, was given the opportunity to respond, had representation, was provided with written decisions, and received an appeal hearing before a different decision-maker. The tribunal also accepted that the respondent’s concern was not dependent on proving a precise shortfall in the tin, because its essential conclusion was that the claimant had taken money out without authority for the night out. It therefore found the dismissal fair and dismissed the claim. It added that, if dismissal had been unfair, it would have found contributory blameworthy conduct and would have applied a 100% reduction to any basic and/or compensatory award.