Case 2502032/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs D Clarke v Creative Management Services Limited Heard at Newcastle Employment Tribunal Sitting at: Civic Centre — 2025
- Case reference
- 2502032/2024
- Decision date
- 18 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Martin Representation
- Venue
- Newcastle
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs D Clarke
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the respondent dismissed the claimant for conduct after allegations that she had removed items from the school kitchen. It accepted that the decision-maker genuinely believed the claimant had removed a tin of fruit cocktail and had reasonable grounds for that belief, but found the dismissal unfair because of deficiencies in the investigation and process.
The tribunal also found that the respondent was not entitled to dismiss the claimant without notice, so the breach of contract complaint for notice pay was upheld. It found that the claimant contributed to her dismissal and assessed contribution at 40%, and considered there was at least a 50% chance she would have been fairly dismissed if a fair procedure had been followed. A remedy hearing was to be listed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the unfair dismissal complaint well founded. Remedy was reserved for a separate hearing and no award figure was stated in the provided judgment text. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim was for notice pay and was upheld. Remedy was reserved for a separate hearing and no award figure was stated in the provided judgment text. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
10 references- s.98(1) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.98(2) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.86(1) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.122(2) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.123(6) Employment Rights Act 1996
- British Home Stores Limited v Burchell
- Polkey v A E Dayton Services Ltd
- Nelson v BBC (No 2)
- Hollier v Plysu Limited
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.