Mr A Sim v Arnold Clark Automobiles Limited — 2019

The tribunal found that the respondent had a genuine belief that the claimant had committed misconduct, but the dismissal procedure was unfair. It identified serious procedural defects, including the way the initial meeting was conducted, the absence of a proper record of that meeting, confusion over who was carrying out the investigation, the failure to contact witnesses identified by the claimant, and the prior involvement of Ms Carr in advising on the matter before chairing the disciplinary hearing.

The tribunal held that these defects meant the procedure was not within the band of reasonable responses and that the appeal did not cure the unfairness. It therefore upheld the unfair dismissal claim. However, it concluded there was a 100% likelihood the claimant would have been dismissed even if a fair procedure had been followed, and in any event reduced compensation by 100% for contributory conduct.

On wrongful dismissal, the tribunal applied a separate contractual test and concluded that the claimant's conduct did not amount to a fundamental or repudiatory breach of contract. It took account of the claimant's previous practice of approving his own overtime without objection and held that summary dismissal without notice was wrongful. The respondent was ordered to pay 12 weeks' notice pay of £5,105.88.