Claimant v Threemilestone Education Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the dismissal was fair. The claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct relating to two substantiated allegations: failing to ensure proper safeguarding checks on agency staff (allowing 15 staff to work under 'waivers' without appropriate DBS checks) and providing a character reference for a colleague under police investigation against HR advice. Both allegations were found to constitute gross misconduct. The tribunal concluded that the employer had a genuine belief in the claimant's guilt based on reasonable grounds following a reasonable investigation, the procedure was fair and within the range of reasonable responses, and dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses for a headteacher in a special educational needs school with safeguarding responsibilities.
Facts
The claimant was headteacher of an independent special educational needs school. He was dismissed for gross misconduct on two grounds: (1) failing to ensure proper safeguarding checks on agency staff, with 15 staff working under 'waivers' without completed DBS and reference checks, and (2) providing a character reference on headed paper for a teaching assistant under police investigation for domestic violence, contrary to HR advice. The claimant had tendered his resignation in January 2024 intending to leave in August 2024. The disciplinary investigation found he had failed in his duties as the 'accountable individual' for safeguarding by not properly checking the Single Central Register against the list of agency staff and by interpreting an HR email as only prohibiting sending injury records (not the reference) to the colleague.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim, finding the dismissal was fair. The tribunal concluded the employer had a genuine belief in the claimant's guilt based on reasonable grounds following a reasonable investigation. Both proven allegations constituted gross misconduct: the safeguarding failures put vulnerable children at risk and breached statutory requirements, while the reference created reputational and safeguarding risks. The tribunal found the procedure fair despite minor blemishes, and dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses for a headteacher with ultimate safeguarding responsibility.
Practical note
A headteacher in a special educational needs school can be fairly dismissed for gross misconduct where safeguarding failures allow unchecked agency staff to work with vulnerable children, even if the headteacher did not create the 'waiver' system, because the headteacher retains ultimate accountability and had multiple opportunities to discover the problem through proper oversight of the Single Central Register.
Adjustments
Tribunal concluded that if the dismissal had been unfair for procedural reasons, the decision to dismiss was substantively fair and a 100% Polkey reduction would have applied
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6006213/2024
- Decision date
- 27 September 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 6
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- education
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Headteacher
- Service
- 10 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister