In person on 22 & 23 May 2017 Ms Belini – Friend on 14 August to 16 August 2017 For the v Respondent — 2018

The claimant was employed as a finance officer from 1 November 1993 and was dismissed for misconduct arising from alleged failures to follow instructions about confidential information after her return to work in September 2014. The judgment records that she had previously received a final written warning in November 2014, following an earlier disciplinary process in which dismissal had been commuted on appeal to a final written warning.

The tribunal accepted that the respondent had a potentially fair reason for dismissal, namely conduct, and that there were grounds to investigate after the claimant’s 9 February 2015 email and earlier correspondence concerning work-related information. It found that Mr Quinn carried out a reasonable investigation, that the claimant was given the allegations and supporting material, and that she had a fair opportunity to answer them at the disciplinary hearing. The tribunal accepted the panel’s findings that she had continued to work on confidential information from home despite clear instructions not to do so, and that she had disclosed confidential information to the infant school in November 2014.

The tribunal also held that the prior final written warning was valid and had not been shown to have been issued in bad faith or to be manifestly inappropriate. In that context, dismissal was said to be a sanction open to a reasonable employer. The appeal process was also found reasonable: when the claimant did not attend the appeal hearing, her representative remained and presented the case, and the panel was entitled to proceed in her absence. The unfair dismissal claim was therefore dismissed, and no remedy was awarded.