Ms J Tempany v Represented by Mr I Burke Solicitor The Board of Management of Forth Valley — 2024

Ms J Tempany was employed by The Board of Management of Forth Valley College from 26 March 2007 until her summary dismissal on 5 July 2023. The dismissal arose from her role in the Fuel Change project, where the respondent became concerned about invoicing practices, the use of Paradigm Futures Limited, the creation of Fuel Change Futures Limited, and a £26,000 grant offer. An internal audit report concluded that there had been false representations and an intention to deceive by not disclosing all income relating to the project, although it also stated that a fraud was not present at that time because no financial loss had crystallised.

The tribunal accepted that the respondent followed its fraud, investigation and disciplinary procedures, including suspension on 24 April 2023, an investigation by Sarah Higgins-Rollo, a disciplinary hearing chaired by Kenny MacInnes, and an appeal heard by Lorna Dougall and Liam McCabe. It rejected the claimant’s argument that Mr MacInnes lacked the necessary impartiality because of his earlier involvement and comments on the investigation report. The tribunal found that his involvement was consistent with the respondent’s policy, that his amendments to the report were largely for clarity, and that the investigation itself was thorough and comprehensive.

On the substance of the dismissal, the tribunal found that the claimant did not properly explain her position to the respondent at the disciplinary or appeal stages. In particular, it found that she did not clearly set out that there was an innocent explanation for the change in invoicing practice, the formation of the new company, or the treatment of the GFIB grant. Although the claimant gave a plausible explanation in evidence before the tribunal, the tribunal held that this did not make the employer’s decision unreasonable because the question was whether the dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses available to the respondent.

The tribunal therefore held that the dismissal was fair under section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and dismissed the claim for unfair dismissal.