Case 4103669/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Alan Collins v Interserve FM Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 4103669/2019
- Decision date
- 9 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge I Atack
- Venue
- Dundee
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Alan Collins
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Alan Collins was employed by Interserve FM Limited as a service deck hand at the Overgate Shopping Centre in Dundee from 1 March 2010 until his dismissal on 10 January 2019. The tribunal found that the dismissal followed reports that he had said words to the effect that if he were sacked he would pour petrol into the Overgate and set the management suite alight. After an initial meeting and a formal investigation, he was invited to disciplinary hearings, was accompanied, and was given the allegations and supporting statements. The tribunal also noted that he had been on a final written warning which he had not appealed.
The tribunal found that the respondent had a potentially fair reason for dismissal, namely conduct, under section 98 ERA 1996. Applying the approach in British Home Stores v Burchell and the range of reasonable responses test, it held that the respondent genuinely believed the allegations, had reasonable grounds for that belief, and had carried out as much investigation as was reasonable in the circumstances. The tribunal accepted the evidence of the respondent's witnesses, including that the claimant had admitted saying something similar to the reported words, and it rejected the claimant's case that the witnesses were lying or colluding against him.
The tribunal concluded that the disciplinary process was procedurally fair and in accordance with the respondent's procedures and the ACAS Code. It accepted that the allegation relating to Gill Wallis was not proved, but held that the remaining findings were sufficient to justify dismissal. It also accepted that the claimant was paid eight weeks' pay in lieu of notice, rather than being summarily dismissed.
The claimant tried to appeal, but the respondent refused to consider the appeal because it was out of time and no explanation had been given for the delay. The tribunal held that refusal to entertain the appeal was reasonable. For those reasons, the claimant's unfair dismissal claim was dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the reason for dismissal was conduct, that the investigation and disciplinary process were reasonable, and that dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. The claimant's appeal was refused as out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- section 98(1) ERA 1996
- section 98(4) ERA 1996
- British Home Stores v Burchell
- Iceland Frozen Foods v Jones
- ACAS Code
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.