The claimant had been found 100% responsible for his unfair dismissal. The Employment Appeal Tribunal had reversed that decision, and the respondent appealed that decision in turn. The claimant was a postman, and his employers considered that he had misdelivered or withheld post. The investigation was criticised, but a further investigation after the hearing supported the dismissal. Where, given what was known at the dismissal, it was not reasonable to dismiss without giving opportunity to explain but discoveries show that that dismissal was merited, compensation could be nil. This ensures that an employee who could have been fairly dismissed does not get compensation. On reversing the tribunal’s decision the EAT seemed to have fallen into the same error, that of substituting its own view of the facts for that of the lower level decision maker. The original tribunal’s decision could not be said to be wrong in law, and was re-instated.
Citations:
[1997] EWCA Civ 1467
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Sillifant v Powell Duffryn Timber Ltd CA 1983
The court explained the principle on ‘British Labour Pump’ as follows: ‘even if, judged in the light of the circumstances known at the time of dismissal, the employer’s decision was not reasonable because of some failure to follow a fair procedure . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.141863