Mr P Jackson v Leeds City Council — 2022

The claimant was employed by Leeds City Council as a Residential Practitioner in a children's home and was dismissed after the respondent learned that he had been arrested, charged and convicted in relation to permitting the production of cannabis at a property he rented out. The tribunal found that the principal reason for dismissal was the claimant's conscious failure to inform the respondent about the arrest and charges despite opportunities to do so, and the respondent's view that this amounted to a fundamental breach of trust.

The tribunal found that the respondent had a potentially fair reason for dismissal, both conduct and some other substantial reason. It held that the respondent had reasonable grounds for its belief: the claimant accepted the arrest and charge had not been disclosed, the respondent did not need a DBS check to establish that matter, and LADO's position did not prevent the respondent from considering the issue under its own disciplinary process. The tribunal also found it was reasonable for the respondent to conclude that the claimant had consciously decided not to disclose the matter and had misled his manager in June 2020 by giving the false impression that the charges would not be pursued.

The tribunal accepted that the respondent could have provided more support during suspension and that the delay in the disciplinary process was unreasonable, particularly between July and October 2020. However, it held that those procedural errors did not make the dismissal unfair because the investigation, disciplinary hearing and appeal were otherwise fair and the outcome would almost certainly have been the same. Taking account of the claimant's long unblemished service, good work record, mental health evidence and the comments made by the criminal court judge, the tribunal concluded that dismissal remained within the range of reasonable responses and dismissed the claim.