Cases4103512/2023

Claimant v The Scottish Ministers

9 December 2025Before Employment Judge D N JonesScotlandin person

Outcome

Claimant succeeds£29,748

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalsucceeded

The tribunal found the investigation fundamentally flawed, failed to adhere to the respondent's own policy in material respects (unsigned witness statements), was not comprehensive or analytical, and the decision maker did not have reasonable grounds for believing the claimants were guilty. The dismissals were not within the band of reasonable responses.

Facts

Three prison officers (physical training instructors) at HMP Edinburgh were summarily dismissed following an allegation by a prisoner that they had assaulted him in his cell on 6 September 2022 after he had verbally abused an officer. The prisoner alleged he was pinned down and repeatedly punched. The claimants denied using inappropriate force, stating they had gone to challenge his behaviour. An investigation was carried out, followed by disciplinary hearings and appeals, all resulting in dismissal. The case was sisted pending criminal proceedings which did not proceed to trial.

Decision

The tribunal found all three claimants were unfairly dismissed. The investigation was fundamentally flawed: key witness statements (including that of the prisoner alleging assault) were unsigned in breach of policy; the investigation lacked critical analysis and balance; inconsistencies in the prisoner's account were not properly examined; and the decision maker did not have reasonable grounds for believing the claimants guilty. Two claimants were ordered reinstated, one received compensation. All awards reduced by 20% for contributory conduct (failure to report the prisoner's behaviour promptly).

Practical note

An employer's failure to follow its own investigation procedures (particularly requiring signed witness statements), combined with lack of critical analysis of conflicting evidence and acceptance of uncorroborated allegations from a complainant without examining inconsistencies, will render a dismissal unfair even where serious allegations are involved.

Award breakdown

Basic award£2,284
Compensatory award£27,464
Pension loss£6,156

Adjustments

Contributory fault20%

The claimants' failure to report the conduct of prisoner B in the appropriate manner timeously contributed to the disciplinary proceedings taken against them. A contemporaneous record would have been available had they followed the correct procedure.

Legal authorities cited

Shrestha v Genesis Housing Association Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 94BHS v Burchell [1978] IRLR 379Sharkey v Lloyds Bank plc EATS 0005/15Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust v Roldan [2010] ICR

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.94ERA 1996 s.123(6)ERA 1996 s.98(4)ERA 1996 s.98(1)(a)

Case details

Case number
4103512/2023
Decision date
9 December 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
7
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
public sector
Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor

Employment details

Role
Residential Officer / Physical Training Instructor
Service
10 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No