Mr J W Cotterill v Sodexo Limited — 2022

The claimant was summarily dismissed after the respondent concluded that he had fraudulently claimed overtime for a cancelled snow and ice call-out and had removed scaffolding poles without appropriate authorisation. The tribunal found the reason for dismissal related to conduct and was potentially fair, but concluded that the respondent did not act reasonably in treating that composite reason as sufficient for dismissal.

For the overtime allegations, the tribunal found the investigation seriously defective because the respondent did not pursue relevant lines of inquiry about the alleged practice for aborted call-outs, including speaking to employees and managers identified by the claimant and asking the authorising manager about approval of the payment. The tribunal found the respondent did not have reasonable grounds to sustain a belief that the claimant had fraudulently claimed payment.

For the scaffolding allegation, the tribunal found defects in the investigation into permission and authority, including failures to clarify the manager's statement and to explore relevant evidence from other witnesses before dismissal. The appeal made up for some of the earlier failures by interviewing one witness, but not enough to make the dismissal fair overall.

On wrongful dismissal, the tribunal found the respondent had not proved that the claimant repudiated the contract. It accepted that the claimant genuinely believed he was entitled to the snow and ice payment and found that a manager had told him he could take the scaffolding poles. The tribunal reduced compensation for unfair dismissal by 20% on Polkey grounds and by 10% for contributory conduct, based on the claimant's failure to obtain written authority for the scaffolding; it applied the same 10% reduction to the basic award.