Case 3204803/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Ali v Sky UK Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3204803/2021
- Decision date
- 11 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Park Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Ali
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant was dismissed after an investigation and disciplinary process concerning allegations of inappropriate conduct towards colleagues on 9 January 2020 and 27 January 2020. The tribunal found that the Respondent established conduct as the reason for dismissal, which was a potentially fair reason, and that the decision-makers had considered the misconduct allegations rather than any other asserted motive.
The tribunal found that the dismissing manager genuinely believed the allegations were true and had reasonable grounds for that belief. It accepted that the manager considered the evidence, the Claimant's denials, his assertion that allegations were fabricated, and his refusal during the investigation to answer some questions or permit CCTV to be viewed at that time.
The tribunal concluded that the investigation and overall procedure fell within the range of reasonable responses. It found that it was not necessary to re-interview two witnesses, that it was within the reasonable band of responses to keep the grievance separate from the disciplinary process, and that dismissal was reasonable in the circumstances. The unfair dismissal claim failed and was dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claim for unfair dismissal did not succeed and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The ET1 had indicated a claim for other payments, but at the outset the Claimant confirmed he was not pursuing any claim for wages or other payments. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
15 references- s.94 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.98 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Thomson v Alloa Motor Co Ltd [1983] IRLR 403
- JP Morgan Securities plc v Ktorza UKEAT/0311/16
- British Home Stores Ltd v Burchell [1978] IRLR 379
- Burchell test
- Boys and Girls Welfare Society v McDonald [1996] IRLR 129
- range of reasonable responses
- Iceland Frozen Foods Ltd v Jones [1982] IRLR 439
- Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd v Hitt [2003] IRLR 23
- A v B [2003] IRLR 405
- CRO Ports London Ltd v Mr P Wiltshire UKEAT/0344/14/DM
- Taylor v OCS Group Ltd 2006 ICR 1602
- s.207 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures 2009
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.