EAT Unfair dismissal – Reasonableness of dismissal / Compensation
The employee, a school teacher, was subjected to a disciplinary procedure for alleged acts of misconduct of an inappropriate sexual nature with respect to his pupils. There was evidence that he might be suffering from some illness which could have explained his conduct. The employers resolved to refer the matter to Occupational Health to investigate the medical position but in fact dismissed him before that was done. The Tribunal found that the dismissal was unfair but that it could not speculate as to what would have happened had the referral been made. The EAT dismissed an appeal against the finding on liability but concluded that the Tribunal ought to have considered what would have happened had the referral been made. In the light of the psychiatric evidence before the Tribunal the only possible conclusion was that the dismissal would have occurred in any event, even had the referral been made. The EAT held that in the exceptional circumstances of this case, and bearing in mind the overriding objective, it would itself determine the compensation. It did so, on the assumption that it would have taken some 10 weeks to comply with the referral procedure before the dismissal would inevitably have occurred.
Citations:
[2007] UKEAT 0373 – 07 – 1712
Links:
Citing:
Cited – Software 2000 Ltd v Andrews etc EAT 17-Jan-2007
EAT Four employees successfully established before the Employment Tribunal that they had been unfairly dismissed for redundancy. The Tribunal found that there had been procedural defects. In particular the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.263990