Claimant v Marks and Spencer PLC
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the respondent had a genuine belief in the claimant's guilt of sexual harassment, based on reasonable investigation and evidence from multiple witnesses. The decision to dismiss fell within the range of reasonable responses of a reasonable employer. While there was a procedural breach (less than 24 hours' notice of disciplinary hearing), this did not render the dismissal unfair as the claimant confirmed he was ready to proceed, was accompanied by a representative, and had a fair opportunity to respond to all allegations.
Facts
The claimant, a customer assistant at M&S Camberley store from September 2019, was dismissed for gross misconduct on 24 November 2023 following complaints of sexual harassment from two female colleagues (CW and DS). The allegations included unwanted physical contact, inappropriate comments, and persistent unwanted advances between April 2022 and August 2023. An investigation was conducted by Mr Chapman in September 2023, followed by disciplinary hearings on 16 and 20 November 2023 conducted by Mr Clarke. The claimant denied the allegations or offered innocent explanations. An appeal was heard by Mr Toms in January 2024 and was unsuccessful.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim. Despite a procedural breach (less than 24 hours' notice of the disciplinary hearing), the tribunal found the respondent had conducted a reasonable investigation, formed a genuine belief in the claimant's guilt based on reasonable grounds, and that dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses for sexual harassment. The claimant's cultural background and alleged reading difficulties did not render the process unfair, as he demonstrated full understanding throughout and did not request adjustments.
Practical note
Even where there is a minor procedural breach (failure to give 24 hours' notice), an unfair dismissal claim will fail if the overall process was fair, the claimant was given adequate opportunity to respond, and dismissal for sexual harassment was within the range of reasonable responses based on credible witness evidence.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3304011/2024
- Decision date
- 5 September 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- retail
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- customer assistant
- Service
- 4 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep