Miss Louise Brown v Veolia ES (UK) Ltd — 2019

The tribunal found that the respondent had established a conduct-related reason for dismissal. The dismissing officer genuinely believed the claimant had behaved inappropriately towards a subordinate, Mr Bolton, and had reasonable grounds for that belief because a number of witnesses supported the general allegation. Although the tribunal described the investigation and disciplinary process as a catalogue of ineptitude and misjudgement, it was just persuaded that the process fell within the band of reasonable responses and the unfair dismissal complaint failed.

The tribunal was critical of several aspects of the process, including the initial surveillance, delays, vague allegations, limited particularisation of witness evidence, refusal of an adjournment, and refusal to allow the claimant to contact potential witnesses while suspended. However, it held that the respondent had obtained a body of evidence from a number of people describing the effect of the claimant's manner, particularly on Mr Bolton, and that it was not for the tribunal to substitute its own view for the dismissing officer's conclusion on dismissal.

The wrongful dismissal complaint succeeded. The tribunal accepted that the claimant could be abrupt but was not satisfied that the respondent had proved gross misconduct under its own policy, including the intentional element required for bullying under the Dignity at Work policy. The tribunal held that dismissal should have been on notice rather than summary dismissal. It awarded agreed gross damages of £8,010.26 and a 5% uplift of £400.51 for an unreasonable breach of paragraph 8 of the ACAS Code relating to failure to keep suspension under review.