Mr U Hayat v Care Quality Commission — 2021

The claimant was dismissed after failing to deal with eight open enquiries while covering a colleague's annual leave, including two safeguarding enquiries and matters concerning a suspended ambulance service. The tribunal found the relevant events were largely undisputed and that the respondent reasonably treated the failure as a conduct issue rather than a capability issue, given the claimant's training, support, job responsibilities, and previous sign-off on portfolio management.

The tribunal accepted that the claimant had raised stress, workload concerns, and possible learning or psychological issues, but found that the respondent had provided substantial support and training and had obtained occupational health input. It found the respondent had a genuine and reasonably held belief that the claimant failed to prioritise urgent enquiries and that the investigation and procedure, including the appeal and later ASD assessment, were reasonable.

The tribunal held that dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses because dealing with safeguarding notifications was a fundamental part of the inspector role and the omissions had potential consequences for service users and the respondent's regulatory functions. For wrongful dismissal, the tribunal found the claimant's failure amounted to gross misconduct and justified summary dismissal.