Mr Andrew Watson (Counsel) For the v Mr Daniel Godfrey (Representative) — 2022

The claimant, Colin O’Rourke, was employed by Kab Seating Ltd from 24 March 1986 and was summarily dismissed on 15 February 2021 while employed as Production Manager. The dismissal followed an investigation into an incident on 19 January 2021 involving the claimant and Lee Bailey. The tribunal recorded that the claimant denied using abusive or threatening language, while the respondent relied on witness evidence and the findings of its investigator, Dawn Exley, to say that two allegations were made out and that summary dismissal was justified.

The tribunal applied the unfair dismissal framework under section 98 ERA 1996 and the misconduct guidance in British Home Stores v Burchell. It found that Mr Carpenter had a genuine belief that the misconduct occurred, that there were reasonable grounds for that belief, and that the investigation was reasonable in the circumstances. The tribunal relied on the consistency of the respondent’s witnesses, including evidence from Ms Kinch, Mr Wright, Mr Sennett and Mr Bailey, and accepted that the claimant’s account was inconsistent with other evidence in material respects.

The tribunal rejected the claimant’s procedural objections, including the allegations that Mr Carpenter and Mrs Rowson were insufficiently senior or independent, that there were conflicts of interest, and that Mr Carpenter had improperly relied on earlier material from the claimant’s personnel file. It found the investigation timely and thorough, accepted that the appeal was not unfair, and held that any error by Mr Carpenter in assuming he had to choose between the two accounts was not material to the overall fairness of the process.

On sanction, the tribunal held that dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses. It found that a reasonable employer could have treated the claimant’s conduct toward his line manager as gross misconduct justifying summary dismissal, even allowing for the claimant’s length of service and other mitigation. The claim of unfair dismissal was therefore dismissed.