Mr J Boyd, counsel v Respondent — 2019

The claimant, Mr J Korpan, was dismissed by Magnox Limited on 9 January 2018 after allegations made by a female worker, Ms LC, that included physical assault, unwanted touching, showing offensive material on a mobile phone, and sexual harassment. The tribunal recorded that the investigation by Mr Payne extended into a wider assessment of the culture in section B462, and that both Mr Payne and the disciplinary officer, Mr Cuthbert, quickly formed the view that Ms LC was credible and truthful before the investigation was complete.

The tribunal found major flaws in the investigation and disciplinary process. Relevant witnesses were either not interviewed at all or were not asked about key matters, evidence suggesting Ms LC may have had a motive linked to what had happened to her father was ignored, and contrary witness accounts were discounted on the basis of collusion without any evidential basis. The tribunal also found that the black book relied on by the employer was not a contemporaneous record, that Ms LC changed a key date when the site attendance problem was raised, and that the dismissal letter did not make clear which allegations had been found proved.

At appeal, Mr Dunham did not rehear the case but reviewed and upheld the earlier decision. The tribunal held that this did not cure the earlier defects. It concluded that the investigation and disciplinary process were incomplete and unreasonable, that no reasonable employer would have conducted the process in that way, and that the dismissal was outside the range of reasonable responses. The tribunal therefore held that the dismissal was both procedurally and substantively unfair.

For wrongful dismissal, the tribunal applied the separate contractual test and held that there was no reliable evidence of gross misconduct justifying summary dismissal. It therefore found the dismissal wrongful. The judgment listed the case for a separate remedy hearing and made no monetary award in the liability judgment.