ANDREW CLARKE v Katmex Limited — 2022

Mr Clarke was summarily dismissed by Katmex Limited on 5 March 2020 after a workplace accident in which he was injured. The tribunal found that he was an experienced welder, that he had previously received safety instruction about manipulators and suspended loads, and that he had also received a final written warning in May 2019 for unrelated misconduct.

The tribunal accepted Katmex’s evidence that it genuinely believed Mr Clarke had committed misconduct on 13 January 2020 by using a poor clamping technique, placing himself too close to the manipulator while operating it, and climbing or leaning on the frame while working. It found those were reasonable grounds for dismissal, relying on the CCTV, the accident investigation report, the reconstruction, and the tribunal’s own assessment that the risks should have been obvious to an experienced welder.

On procedure, the tribunal accepted that the invitation letter to the disciplinary meeting was sparse, but found that it cross-referred to the accident investigation report, which clearly set out the allegations. It held that Mr Clarke understood what was said against him, that the investigation was structured and methodical, and that the absence of a separate investigatory meeting did not make the process unreasonable. The tribunal also found the appeal process was less than satisfactory, largely because Mr Mitchell did not properly understand the purpose of the appeal, but that the delay and defects did not render the dismissal procedurally unfair.

The unfair dismissal claim was therefore dismissed. The wrongful dismissal claim also failed because, on the tribunal’s own evaluation of the evidence, Katmex was entitled to conclude that Mr Clarke had committed repudiatory misconduct and that summary dismissal was justified. No remedy was awarded.