Mrs Charlotte Moore v Governing Body of Trinity St Mary’s Church of England (Aided) Primary School — 2024

Mrs Charlotte Moore was employed as a teacher from 12 April 2021 until her dismissal on 27 July 2023. The disciplinary process followed a parent complaint made on 14 March 2023 about language used in class, after which the respondent investigated further concerns about classroom conduct, pupil wellbeing, alleged physical contact with a child, alleged disrepute, and alleged contact with staff during suspension. A disciplinary hearing on 19 July 2023 found allegations 1 to 7 substantiated and resulted in summary dismissal; the appeal heard on 19 October 2023 was not upheld.

The tribunal applied section 98 ERA 1996, the Burchell test, and the range of reasonable responses approach. It found that the reason for dismissal was the respondent’s genuine belief that the seven allegations upheld at disciplinary stage amounted to misconduct, and that this belief was based on reasonable grounds. Although the investigation had some flaws, including criticisms about the balance of witness interviews, anonymised statements, and the widening of the inquiry, the tribunal held that the investigation taken as a whole was sufficient and that the wider procedure, including delay, HR involvement, and the appeal process, remained within the range of reasonable responses.

On sanction, the tribunal distinguished between the allegations. It held that allegations 4 and 5, which concerned grabbing a child by the neck and collar, were capable of amounting to gross misconduct and that the respondent was entitled to regard them as sufficiently serious to justify dismissal. By contrast, it concluded that allegations 1, 2, 3, 6 and 7 were not shown to be so serious, viewed on their own, without a proper balancing exercise that took account of the positive lesson observations, performance reviews, and SENCO evidence. However, because the respondent treated the allegations as standalone charges and allegations 4 and 5 alone justified dismissal, the tribunal found the dismissal fair and dismissed the unfair dismissal complaint. As a result, it did not need to determine Polkey or contribution.