In person For the v Respondent — 2022

The claimant, a supported living carer, was dismissed after an incident on 14 April 2020 involving resident AR. The tribunal found that she had signed AR's risk assessment after reading it, but later used a hoist to move AR from the lounge to the bedroom while AR remained in the toileting sling, contrary to the Safer People Handling Procedure. It also found that AR's bed had not been lowered to floor level as required by the risk assessment, and that AR later fell from the bed onto the floor. The tribunal found the hoist was intended to be used statically, not to transport a resident between rooms.

Applying Burchell and s.98(4) ERA 1996, the tribunal held that the respondent carried out a reasonable investigation, genuinely believed the misconduct had occurred on reasonable grounds, and was entitled to treat the breaches as gross misconduct. Ms Frost's account and the claimant's admissions were central to that conclusion. The tribunal also found that the disciplinary and appeal hearings were fair, that dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses, and that the wrongful dismissal/breach of contract claim failed because the conduct justified summary dismissal without notice or pay in lieu.

The direct race discrimination claim was dismissed. The claimant, a Romanian national, relied on British comparators, but the tribunal found the comparator circumstances were not materially the same and that the reason for dismissal was the serious safeguarding breach, not race or nationality. The claimant also brought disability-related claims based on multiple sclerosis, including discrimination arising from disability and failure to make reasonable adjustments, but those claims were struck out after she failed to pay the ordered £500 deposit. Two unlawful deduction from wages claims were withdrawn: one concerning sick pay, after she accepted she had been paid, and one concerning alleged unpaid wages, after she accepted her pay had not been withheld. No award was made.