Mr A M McCann v Acorn Care and Education Limited — 2021

The tribunal held that the reason for dismissal was conduct. The respondent relied on two allegations: breach of professional boundaries with pupil G, and breach of GDPR and IT policy by sending a work-related email containing sensitive information to a personal email account. Much of the conduct relied upon for allegation 1 was admitted by the claimant, including contact with the pupil outside school, emailing the pupil, taking the pupil to football, visiting the foster carer, sharing his personal address, and buying a gift. The claimant also admitted sending a confidential report containing sensitive information to his home email address.

Applying section 98(4) ERA 1996 and the Burchell approach, the tribunal found that Ms Henderson had a genuine belief on reasonable grounds after a reasonable investigation. It accepted that the claimant was a Deputy Designated Safeguarding Lead with Level 5 safeguarding training, working with highly vulnerable pupils, and that the safeguarding and safer-working guidance made professional boundaries, data protection, social contact, gifts, home visits and transport of pupils clearly relevant. The tribunal found the respondent was entitled to regard the claimant’s conduct as inconsistent with those standards, and it accepted that the claimant had little insight into the behaviour.

The tribunal also rejected the claimant’s procedural complaints. It found he had two investigatory interviews, a disciplinary hearing with the relevant documentation, written questions were put to witnesses, and there was no legal entitlement to cross-examine them. On appeal, one factual point was corrected in the claimant’s favour: the appeal officer did not uphold the finding that he had specifically invited the child to stay overnight. Even so, the tribunal held that the dismissal remained within the band of reasonable responses and was fair. The claim was therefore dismissed and no remedy was awarded.