Claimant v Compass Group, UK and Ireland Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the respondent genuinely believed the claimant was guilty of gross misconduct relating to serious food safety breaches (storing raw meat near ready-to-eat sandwiches in breach of cross-contamination procedures), held that belief on reasonable grounds following a reasonable investigation, and that dismissal fell within the band of reasonable responses given the claimant's previous level 1 warning for food safety breaches and his admissions of culpability during the disciplinary process.
Facts
The claimant, a Commis Chef employed by Compass Group at their flagship Bank of America contract, was dismissed for gross misconduct on 8 October 2024. The dismissal followed a 17 September 2024 incident where he stored raw meat next to ready-to-eat sandwiches in a fridge designated for sandwich preparation, creating serious cross-contamination risks. The claimant had received a level 1 warning in March 2024 for a previous food safety breach involving improperly stored fermented cabbage. During the disciplinary process the claimant admitted his mistakes but also made various unsubstantiated allegations about other food safety breaches by colleagues. His appeal was rejected following investigation of his allegations.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim, finding that the respondent genuinely believed the claimant was guilty of gross misconduct, held that belief on reasonable grounds following a reasonable investigation applying the Burchell test, and that dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses. The tribunal found the procedure fair and ACAS-compliant. The tribunal refused the claimant's late application to amend to add whistleblowing claims and various other procedural applications.
Practical note
Even where a claimant raises allegations of comparable misconduct by others, dismissal for serious food safety breaches will be fair where the employer follows proper procedure, the employee has a previous warning for similar conduct, and the employee admitted culpability during the disciplinary process.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2200700/2025
- Decision date
- 1 December 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 4
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- hospitality
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- in house
Employment details
- Role
- Commis Chef
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No