Case 2400505/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Blythe v Network Rail Infrastructure Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2400505/2020
- Decision date
- 1 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Blythe
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was dismissed for alleged gross misconduct after the respondent concluded that he had directed the word "monkey" at a colleague during a shift on 10 August 2019. The tribunal found that the dismissing manager genuinely believed the alleged misconduct had occurred and that this was the reason for dismissal. It found the investigation and procedure, viewed as a whole and including the appeal, were within the range of reasonable responses, despite some procedural imperfections such as not providing the original complaint email and an initial witness email.
For unfair dismissal, the tribunal found the respondent had reasonable grounds for its belief based on the accounts before it, and that dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses for the misconduct the dismissing manager found had occurred. The appeal was described as restricted and limited, but this did not render the dismissal unfair.
For the breach of contract claim, the tribunal applied a different question: whether the alleged misconduct actually occurred on the balance of probabilities. Having heard the claimant's evidence and noting discrepancies in the written accounts, the tribunal preferred the claimant's evidence and found he did not direct the alleged comment to the colleague. It therefore found the claimant had not fundamentally breached his contract and that the respondent breached the contract by dismissing without notice.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was not unfairly dismissed. It accepted the respondent genuinely believed the claimant had made the alleged comment, had reasonable grounds for that belief, carried out a reasonable investigation and followed a fair procedure. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the respondent breached the claimant's contract by dismissing him without notice. Remedy was not finally determined in this judgment; the judgment referred to the sum claimed as believed to be £5,442 and directed the parties to confirm or resolve remedy. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
9 references- s.98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996
- British Home Stores v Burchell [1980] ICR 303
- range of reasonable responses
- ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures
- London Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Small [2009] EWCA Civ 220
- Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust v Roldan [2010] IRLR 721
- Taylor v OCS Group Ltd [2006] IRLR 613
- Hussain v Elonex Plc [1999] IRLR 420
- British Heart Foundation v Roy UKEAT/49/15
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.