Marc Fallows v Sodexo Limited — 2024

The claimant accepted that the respondent's stated reason for dismissal was conduct, but argued that the dismissal was unfair because too much weight was placed on his line manager's account, further evidence was not obtained, he had not received the prisoner complaint earlier, dismissal was outside the range of reasonable responses, and he had been denied an appeal.

The tribunal found that the respondent was entitled to rely on evidence from the line manager, which was broadly consistent with other evidence. It found that the absence of CCTV, and the decision not to interview PCO Toni Williams, PO Francis, or prisoners on cleaning duties, did not make the investigation unreasonable in the circumstances, particularly given the claimant's admissions and the other evidence available. It also found that although the handling of prisoner N's complaint could have been clearer, it did not render the dismissal unfair.

The tribunal accepted that the respondent had initially made mistakes in rejecting and failing to progress the claimant's appeal, but noted that an appeal to an independent decision maker was later offered and refused. It concluded that dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses, having regard to the claimant's conduct towards prisoners and his line manager in the prison environment, and dismissed the unfair dismissal claim.