Case 3200750/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Robinson v Homerton University Hospital University Trust — 2020
- Case reference
- 3200750/2020
- Decision date
- 7 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Housego Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Robinson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs L Robinson’s only claim was unfair dismissal. The tribunal found that Homerton University Hospital University Trust dismissed her for misconduct, namely concerns arising from the June 2019 complaints and the claimant’s interactions with Patient B after the complaint from Patient A. It held that conduct was the genuine reason for dismissal and that the employer’s decision-making was based on what it reasonably believed after investigation.
The tribunal accepted that there were procedural shortcomings. It found that the disciplinary process was delayed, that the investigation report went beyond its proper role by making findings of fact on disputed matters, and that earlier complaints were improperly treated as disciplinary allegations rather than background. It also said that issues of alleged lack of integrity or dishonesty were not allegations that had been put to the claimant and should not have been weighed against her.
Even so, the tribunal concluded that the dismissal was not outside the band of reasonable responses. It held that the employer was entitled to regard the admitted conduct, the June 2019 allegations as genuinely perceived, and the prior history of complaints as background relevant to sanction. The tribunal also found it reasonable not to take a witness statement from Patient B, and reasonable for the decision makers to conclude that the claimant had shown Patient B a document connected with Patient A’s complaint.
The claim was therefore dismissed. The tribunal added that if it had found the dismissal unfair, there would have been a 100% Polkey reduction in both basic and compensatory award, and it recorded that on the facts as found there would have been no award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the dismissal was for conduct and held that, although there were procedural criticisms, the decision to dismiss fell within the range of reasonable responses. It stated that if the dismissal had been unfair there would have been a 100% Polkey reduction, and no award was made because the claim failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.98(2) ERA 1996
- s.98(4) ERA 1996
- Burchell test
- band of reasonable responses
- Polkey reduction
- ACAS Code of Practice 1
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.