Case 2303591/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Lopez v The Secretary of State for Justice — 2021
- Case reference
- 2303591/2018
- Decision date
- 9 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Corrigan Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Lopez
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed as a prison officer and was dismissed after disciplinary proceedings concerning a WhatsApp group involving prison staff. The tribunal recorded that the claimant accepted he had posted one image which was extremely offensive on multiple levels, and that he accepted during the process that it could be considered unprofessional conduct and could bring discredit on the Prison Service.
For unfair dismissal, the tribunal found there was no dispute that the claimant posted the image and that the respondent had a genuine belief in misconduct, held on reasonable grounds after a reasonable investigation. The tribunal considered the claimant's arguments about inconsistent treatment of other staff but found those treated more leniently were not in truly parallel circumstances and that the decision to dismiss the claimant was within the range of reasonable responses.
For wrongful dismissal, the tribunal found that deliberately posting the highly offensive image on a WhatsApp group of colleagues seriously breached the respondent's code and was incompatible with the role of a prison officer. It concluded the conduct was sufficiently serious to justify dismissal without notice.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the dismissal was for misconduct, that the respondent had a genuine belief based on reasonable grounds after a reasonable investigation, and that dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant's conduct was sufficiently serious to justify dismissal without notice. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
8 references- s.98 Employment Rights Act 1996
- British Home Stores Ltd v Burchell 1978 IRLR 379
- range of reasonable responses
- Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd v Hitt [2003] IRLR 23
- Hadjioannous v Coral Casinos [1981] 1WLUK 473
- MBNA v Jones [2015] 9 WLUK 7
- Wells & Anor v Cathay Investments 2 Ltd & Anor [2019] EWHC 2996 (QB)
- C and Others v Chief Constable of the Police Service of Scotland and Others [2020] CSOH 61
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.