EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reasonableness of dismissal
The Claimant was a consultant doctor. She was found to have been guilty of two acts of gross misconduct. The first was that she had put pressure on a patient to take part in a clinical trial. The other was that she had publicly used qualifications which she did not in fact possess. The Respondent summarily dismissed her. The Employment Tribunal found that the dismissal was unfair because the Respondent had not properly taken into consideration the mitigation that was available to the Claimant and that the sanction of dismissal was outside the range of reasonable responses available to a reasonable employer.
Held, (1) The Employment Tribunal had fallen into the error of substituting its own view for that of the Respondent. The Respondent had taken mitigation into account, at least at the appeal stage of its process. (2) Further and in any event, the Employment Tribunal’s view was one to which no reasonable Tribunal could have come on the facts of this case.
Singh J
[2014] UKEAT 0198 – 14 – 1212
Bailii
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 03 January 2022; Ref: scu.551974