Case 3200334/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Kerins v Barclays Bank UK plc — 2020
- Case reference
- 3200334/2019
- Decision date
- 10 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Moor Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Kerins
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct following events involving a colleague after a work Christmas party. The respondent did not rely at the tribunal on an allegation that the claimant put codeine in the colleague's drink, because that allegation had not been upheld on appeal. The tribunal considered the unfair dismissal claim by reviewing the employer's process and conclusions, including the appeal stage.
For unfair dismissal, the tribunal criticised aspects of the investigation and disciplinary stage, including delay, the handling of the codeine allegation, and aspects of the dismissing officer's approach. However, it found that the appeal officer took an even-handed approach, narrowed the basis of the decision, and had reasonable grounds for concluding that the claimant's conduct in the hotel room and the kiss amounted to misconduct. It held that dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses given the respondent's standards, policies, and findings about unwanted physical contact and personal space.
For wrongful dismissal, the tribunal made its own findings on the evidence. It found that the claimant's sitting on the colleague's bed and a kiss on the cheek that accidentally touched her lips were unwanted and made her uncomfortable, and therefore amounted to misconduct. It also found the conduct was unintentional, occurred in the context of a close friendship, was a single incident, and was not so serious as to amount to gross misconduct. The wrongful dismissal claim therefore succeeded, and the claimant was awarded 12 weeks' notice losses totalling £12,282.39.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the respondent had a genuine belief in misconduct on reasonable grounds after a reasonable investigation when the process was viewed as a whole, and that dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant's conduct was misconduct but not gross misconduct amounting to a repudiatory breach, so dismissal without notice breached contract. | Upheld | — | £12,282 |
| Holiday pay | Dismissed upon withdrawal before the hearing. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | Dismissed upon withdrawal before the hearing. | Withdrawn | Sex | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £12,282
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
16 references- s.98 ERA 1996
- s.98(4) ERA 1996
- BHS Ltd v Burchell
- Iceland Frozen Foods v Jones
- range of reasonable responses
- Newbound v Thames Water Utilities Ltd
- Ramphal v Department for Transport
- Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd v Hitt
- Taylor v OCS Group Ltd
- ACAS Code of Practice
- Polkey v A E Dayton Services Ltd
- ss.122(2) and 123(6) ERA 1996
- Mohamud v WM Morrison
- Livesey v Parker Merchanting Ltd
- Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994 article 3
- Neary v Dean of Westminster
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.