Case 2303409/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Sampson v Lawtech Group Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2303409/2018
- Decision date
- 4 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Beckett Dated
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Sampson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought claims for automatic unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal and unlawful deduction of wages. The tribunal found that on 18 June 2018 he took 150 minutes to complete asbestos awareness training, scored 93.33%, and signed a contract that referred to the respondent's handbook and disciplinary procedure. The handbook listed sleeping during working hours as gross misconduct, and the contract reserved the right to dismiss without procedure for those with insufficient service.
On the dismissal issue, the tribunal found that the primary reason for dismissal was that the claimant was asleep during an important management meeting about the Brewster and Malting site, including health and safety matters. It accepted evidence from the respondent's witnesses that he was snoring loudly and had to be prodded to wake up, and it preferred that evidence over the claimant's account that he had been taking an authorised break. On that basis, the tribunal held that the dismissal was not automatically unfair.
The wrongful dismissal claim also failed. The tribunal held that sleeping during the meeting was conduct that justified withholding notice, describing it as gross misconduct under the respondent's policy and as a repudiatory breach of contract. For the wage claim, the tribunal did not accept that the claimant attended the site on 22 June 2018, noting that his name did not appear on the site attendance record and that he had already been dismissed the previous day. Even if he had attended, the tribunal found that he was not authorised to do so and therefore was not entitled to payment for that day.
After dismissing all three claims, the tribunal noted the earlier deposit order and found that the claimant had acted unreasonably in pursuing each allegation. It therefore ordered that the £750 deposit be paid to the respondent.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The pleaded basis was automatic unfair dismissal said to arise from the Working Time Regulations, but the tribunal found the principal reason for dismissal was that the claimant was asleep during a management meeting. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found that sleeping during working hours, in a management meeting, was gross misconduct under the respondent's policy and a repudiatory breach of contract, so notice could be withheld. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal did not accept that the claimant attended work on 22 June 2018; even if he had, he had been dismissed the previous day and was not authorised to attend. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.