Claimant v I.C.T.S (UK) Limited

Outcome

Facts

The claimant was an administrator responsible for vetting and recruitment at a security company providing aviation security services at Scottish airports. She was dismissed for alleged gross misconduct relating to the vetting of a new employee, Jim Scott Paton, specifically: failing to inform management that vetting was incomplete before annual leave; falsely confirming vetting was complete on 23 July 2024; and failing to upload documents to the ID Gateway system. The claimant had also requested occupational health referrals for a prolapsed disc condition in the months prior. She maintained she had completed vetting (obtaining criminal record check, counter-terrorism check, and five-year employment history including a gap reference received on 30 July) before her annual leave began on 31 July, and handed over remaining administrative tasks to a colleague.

Decision

The tribunal found the unfair dismissal claim succeeded because the investigation was unreasonable: the respondent failed to investigate objectively verifiable documentary evidence (the gap reference email, vetting pack, ID Gateway audit trail) that could confirm when vetting was completed; failed to properly investigate the colleague's role; conflated the legislative vetting requirements with local ID pass application procedures; and had no reasonable grounds to believe the allegations were substantiated. The dismissal fell outside the band of reasonable responses. The victimisation claim failed as the respondent proved the dismissal was not because of the claimant's requests for occupational health support.

Practical note

Award breakdown

Legal authorities cited