Case 1800994/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Coleman v Doncaster Culture & Leisure Trust — 2023
- Case reference
- 1800994/2023
- Decision date
- 25 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Date
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Coleman
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant, a swimming teacher for the Respondent, made a remark to a female primary school pupil during a lesson on 30 September 2022, saying that "it looks like you work out". The Claimant accepted making the remark and accepted that it was inappropriate. The school complained to the Respondent the same day, saying the comment was inappropriate and had made the pupil and teacher feel uncomfortable. The Claimant was suspended on full pay on 1 October 2022, investigated, and dismissed with immediate effect on 11 October 2022. His appeal was dismissed on 21 October 2022.
On the unfair dismissal claim, the tribunal applied s.98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the approach in British Home Stores v Burchell. It found that the Respondent genuinely believed the Claimant was guilty of misconduct on reasonable grounds, that the investigation was reasonable, and that the procedure was fair. The tribunal accepted that the decision to dismiss could be seen as harsh because it was a first offence and a single remark, but held that the Respondent was entitled to treat the conduct as a safeguarding concern and as conduct that might bring its name into disrepute. It found that dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses and dismissed the unfair dismissal claim.
On wrongful dismissal, the tribunal held that it had to decide for itself whether the conduct amounted to a fundamental breach of contract. It found that the same conduct, in the context of a male swimming teacher speaking to a 10 or 11 year old girl in swimwear about her body and appearance, was highly inappropriate and amounted to gross misconduct. The tribunal therefore held that the Claimant was not entitled to notice of termination and dismissed the wrongful dismissal claim.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed under s.98(4) ERA 1996 after the tribunal found the Respondent reasonably believed the Claimant had committed misconduct, carried out a reasonable investigation, followed a fair procedure, and was entitled to regard the conduct as gross misconduct and within the range of reasonable responses. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Dismissed because the tribunal found the Claimant's conduct amounted to a fundamental breach of contract / gross misconduct, so he was not entitled to notice pay. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996
- British Home Stores v Burchell [1980] ICR 303
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.