Hawkes v Ausin Group (UK) Ltd: EAT 14 Jun 2018

UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Exclusions including worker/jurisdiction
UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reason for dismissal including substantial other reason
UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reasonableness of dismissal
UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Polkey deduction
The Claimant was a Reservist in the Marines. He was dismissed without warning for some other substantial reason in that he had committed to undertake a seven-week training exercise abroad which was not something that the Respondent, a small employer, could accommodate. The ET found that the dismissal was not unfair. The Claimant contended that the ET erred in that in assessing fairness, it had considered questions relevant only to whether there ought to be a Polkey reduction. There was also a challenge to the ET’s finding that there was nothing to indicate that if the Claimant had been warned that he might be dismissed he would have changed his mind.
As to the first ground of appeal, the EAT found that the ET had not erred in assessing fairness. Reading the Judgment as a whole it was clear that the ET had the correct test under section 98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996 in mind and had applied it correctly. Furthermore, the ET had made an express finding of fact that by the time of the dismissal meeting, the Claimant had already decided that he would be attending the exercise. In those circumstances, it was open to the ET to conclude that the failure to hold an earlier meeting would not have changed the position, and its analysis did not amount to an impermissible application of Polkey to the question of unfairness. The second ground was a challenge to a finding of fact in circumstances where there was ample evidence to support the ET’s conclusions.
For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed

Citations:

[2018] UKEAT 0070 – 18 – 1406

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.625443