Mr A Wysoczanski v Currys plc — 2025

The claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct following an investigation into alleged misconduct at the Stamford store. The tribunal accepted the evidence of the respondent's witnesses where it conflicted with the claimant's evidence, and found that the dismissing officer had a reasonable belief, based on a detailed investigation, that the claimant had committed gross misconduct.

The tribunal found that the investigation was reasonable in all the circumstances. It noted concern about the length of the investigation, but accepted that additional matters came to light, there were delays on both sides, and the delay did not make the overall process unfair. The tribunal also found that further investigations at the appeal stage were conducted with an open mind and did not provide a basis to overturn the dismissal.

The tribunal concluded that dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses, including because the claimant was a General Manager and was dismissed in respect of multiple allegations, whereas the other employees relied on for comparison were less senior and were disciplined in different circumstances. The wrongful dismissal claim failed because the respondent was entitled to dismiss summarily for gross misconduct. The unlawful deductions claim failed because company sick pay was discretionary and the claimant had not established an implied contractual term by custom and practice. The respondent's counter-claim for overpaid company sick pay was also dismissed because the tribunal was not provided with the specific contractual clause relied on and the payment arose from an administrative error in a discretionary pay context.