Mrs J Robertson v Dobbies Garden Centres Ltd — 2019

Mrs Robertson was employed by Dobbies Garden Centres Ltd as a Stock Controller at the Dundee store from 12 January 2014 until she resigned with immediate effect on 1 June 2019. The dispute arose after she sold old restaurant furniture, received £150, kept the money at home for a period, and later handed over £110 after a meeting with the new store manager, Colin Curran. She said the proceeds were company money to be paid into the company accounts and that she had been told by the then manager, Kevin Yates, to hold on to them; she also said £40 of the proceeds was used for a birthday present for Mr Yates with the agreement of colleagues.

The tribunal found that Mr Curran was entitled to investigate the anonymous complaint and that his initial meeting with the claimant, the subsequent enquiries, and the referral to formal disciplinary action were all reasonable. It accepted that the claimant found the process upsetting, but it did not accept her evidence that Mr Curran or Mr Townsend behaved inappropriately or that the investigation was started in retaliation for her grievance. The tribunal also found no criticism in the disciplinary hearing chaired by Elaine Faulds, noting that the claimant was given a full opportunity to explain her position and that Ms Faulds had not reached a decision before the claimant resigned.

Applying the constructive dismissal principles under s.95(1)(c) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the implied term of trust and confidence, the tribunal concluded that the respondent had not acted without reasonable and proper cause. It treated the investigation as conscientious and thorough, and held that it was not unreasonable for the respondent to progress the matter to a disciplinary hearing given the conflicting accounts about the £150 and the £40 spent on the birthday present. The tribunal also held that the grievance had been dealt with within a timescale that did not amount to a breach of contract, and that there was no evidence that the investigation was prompted by the grievance.

Because there was no breach of contract, the claimant was not entitled to treat herself as constructively dismissed. The tribunal therefore dismissed the claim of unfair constructive dismissal. It expressly noted that it did not need to determine precisely what happened to the £150 or decide whether the claimant, Mr Yates, or others were telling the truth about the underlying events.