Case 3302477/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Kevser Erturk v Turkish Airlines — 2023
- Case reference
- 3302477/2020
- Decision date
- 18 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto Appearances
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Kevser Erturk
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Kevser Erturk worked for Turkish Airlines from 10 August 2015 until her dismissal on 18 November 2019. Her claim form included unfair dismissal, breach of contract/notice pay, redundancy, holiday pay, other arrears and discrimination on grounds of pregnancy or maternity, religion or belief, disability and sex. The redundancy, sex discrimination, pregnancy and maternity discrimination, holiday pay and arrears claims were withdrawn, and the remaining Equality Act claims were struck out for failure to comply with an unless order, leaving unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal for determination.
The tribunal found that the respondent carried out a detailed investigation into the grievance and misconduct allegations. Mr Hazar took 23 statements and reviewed CCTV, social media, WhatsApp messages and other evidence, and the claimant met him on several occasions. The tribunal accepted that the claimant had taken a photograph of SD's email and sent it to SD's husband, and it accepted some of the other misconduct findings relied on by the respondent.
On the unfair dismissal claim, the tribunal applied section 98 ERA 1996 and the band of reasonable responses. It found that the respondent genuinely believed the claimant was guilty of gross misconduct, had reasonable grounds for that belief, and had carried out a conscientious investigation. It also found that the disciplinary and appeal process was reasonable, and that the claimant did not properly engage with the disciplinary hearing or provide appeal points that could advance her grievance appeal.
On wrongful dismissal, the tribunal held that the admitted email incident, together with the cumulative effect of the other incidents it found proved on the balance of probabilities, amounted to gross misconduct and a repudiatory breach. The respondent was therefore entitled to summarily dismiss without notice. Both unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed; the tribunal found the dismissal fair under section 98 ERA 1996 and within the band of reasonable responses. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The claim was pleaded as breach of contract/failure to pay notice pay. The tribunal held the claimant's admitted and found conduct amounted to gross misconduct and a repudiatory breach justifying summary dismissal without notice. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- s.98 ERA 1996
- band of reasonable responses
- repudiatory breach
- gross misconduct
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.