Mrs P. Mansaray v Goodmayes Medical Practice — 2024

The tribunal dismissed Mrs P. Mansaray's claim of unfair dismissal. It found that the sole reason for dismissal was conduct: the creation of a false contract of employment with an excessive annual leave entitlement, the creation of four false appraisal documents, and the signing of Dr Patel's name on the contract and the 2018 appraisal. The tribunal accepted that the Respondent relied on those matters as misconduct, and that the labels used by Ms Quinn, including "fraudulent" and "falsification", were used to describe that conduct.

On the evidence about the investigation, the tribunal found that no further investigation was reasonably necessary. It accepted that the Claimant admitted creating the appraisal documents, accepted that the appraisal meetings had not taken place, and accepted that she had inserted Dr Patel's name on the 2018 appraisal. As to the contract, the tribunal preferred Dr Patel's account that he had never signed or sent such a contract, and found that Ms Quinn was entitled to prefer that account over the Claimant's unsupported explanation.

Applying section 98 ERA 1996 and the Burchell approach, the tribunal held that Ms Quinn honestly believed the Claimant had acted dishonestly and had reasonable grounds for that belief. It also held that dismissal fell within the band of reasonable responses, having regard to the nature of the documents, the Claimant's senior role, and her responsibility for accurate record-keeping. The tribunal noted procedural concerns, including the failure to disclose Dr Patel's statement before the disciplinary hearing and an error in the dismissal letter, but concluded that those flaws did not render the dismissal unfair when the process was viewed as a whole.