Mr O Nayfeh v Barclays Bank UK plc — 2024

The sole complaint was unfair dismissal. The respondent dismissed the claimant without notice for gross misconduct after finding that he had made inappropriate comments to younger female colleagues. The tribunal accepted that conduct was the potentially fair reason for dismissal, but found the disciplinary hearing and decision-making process were seriously flawed.

The tribunal found that the respondent had not carried out a reasonable investigation or formed reasonable grounds for belief in guilt. The central incident depended on the relative credibility of the claimant and colleague A, but the decision-maker heard directly from the claimant while relying on notes of colleague A's interview. The tribunal also found errors in the way the claimant's denials were assessed, that additional charges were upheld without proper notice, and that the disciplinary outcome was unfairly delayed. The appeal did not correct those defects, including because further evidence from colleague A was not shared with the claimant for comment.

On contributory fault, the tribunal found on the balance of probabilities that the claimant had made one inappropriate sexual remark, asking what was the youngest a 40-year-old could "go with", but did not find the other two original remarks proved. It reduced both the basic and compensatory awards by 15% for contributory fault. It also made a 50% Polkey reduction to the compensatory award, reflecting the chance that the respondent would have dismissed by the same date if it had acted fairly. All other remedy issues were adjourned.