Mrs Dumigan v The Mount School Limited — 2022

Mrs Dumigan worked for The Mount School Limited as a piano and singing teacher from October 1997 until 12 December 2021. On 11 December 2021 Mr Sellers sent staff an email calling a mandatory meeting for 13 December 2021 at short notice. The claimant said she could not attend because of a family gathering about her 90-year-old mother's cancer treatment and care. Mr Sellers responded that the meeting was not optional, then emailed that her employment would cease and that she would be paid until February half-term. The claimant then asked for reasons, an appeal and confirmation that she would receive 12 weeks' notice, but she did not receive a response.

On the unfair dismissal claim, the tribunal accepted that Mr Sellers genuinely believed the claimant had committed gross misconduct by refusing to attend the meeting, but held that the dismissal was outside the range of reasonable responses under section 98(4) ERA 1996. It found that no reasonable investigation or disciplinary hearing took place, the claimant was not told what the meeting was about, and she was not given the chance to put forward her account or mitigating circumstances. The tribunal also found that Mr Sellers had made up his mind to dismiss without considering the matter through the school's normal disciplinary route, without considering alternatives to dismissal, and without providing any appeal.

The tribunal found that the meeting was not explained to the claimant and that she would not have known that it related to a serious safeguarding concern. It concluded that the respondent's request, made at short notice for a meeting on a day when the claimant did not normally work and had already finished for the term, did not amount to a reasonable instruction in the circumstances. Applying Polkey, the tribunal found there was no chance that she would have been fairly dismissed in any event. It also rejected deductions for contributory fault, finding her refusal to attend was not culpable or blameworthy in the circumstances, and it made no deduction for her post-dismissal emails to parents.

The wrongful dismissal claim succeeded because the tribunal found that the claimant was entitled to 12 weeks' notice under her contract and the statutory minimum, and that the respondent breached contract by dismissing her without that notice. The tribunal found that her conduct did not amount to gross misconduct. Liability was determined at this hearing only; the remedy for unfair dismissal was left to a separate hearing, including the question of any section 207A(2) ACAS uplift.