Claimant v St Kentigern Hospice
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the dismissal was fair. The respondent had a genuine belief in the claimant's misconduct (allowing her husband unsupervised access to the warehouse and her office containing confidential documents), carried out a reasonable investigation, followed a procedurally fair process, and dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. The claimant allowed her husband keys to access the warehouse unattended and her office where confidential documents were kept, without senior management's knowledge, creating serious confidentiality and health and safety risks. Despite some procedural defects, the overall process was fair and the respondent was entitled to treat the conduct as fundamentally undermining trust and confidence.
The claim for notice pay was not addressed in the judgment as the tribunal only dealt with the unfair dismissal claim. The parties agreed the hearing would deal with liability only, and the unfair dismissal claim was dismissed, so notice pay was not determined.
Facts
The claimant was a Retail Manager at a hospice charity who gave her husband keys to the warehouse and her office, allowing him to access the premises unsupervised before other staff arrived. Following a whistleblowing complaint, the respondent investigated and discovered the husband had been attending 2-3 days per week, accessing the office where confidential documents were kept, and taking items (which were paid for by the claimant). CCTV footage captured him leaving with an item. The claimant admitted the arrangement but said she trusted her husband 100% and a former CEO had approved it. She did not appreciate the seriousness of the confidentiality and lone-working risks.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim, finding the dismissal was fair. The respondent carried out a reasonable investigation, held a genuine belief in misconduct on reasonable grounds, followed a procedurally fair process (despite some minor defects), and dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. The tribunal found it reasonable for the respondent to treat the claimant's conduct as fundamentally undermining trust and confidence, particularly given her lack of acknowledgment of the seriousness of the risks her conduct created.
Practical note
An employer can fairly dismiss a manager who gives unauthorised access to premises and confidential information to a family member, even where no actual theft or breach occurs, if the conduct creates serious risks to confidentiality and security and the employee fails to appreciate the gravity of those risks.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1601323/2024
- Decision date
- 22 August 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep
Employment details
- Role
- Retail Manager (Retail Operations Manager)
- Salary band
- £30,000–£40,000
- Service
- 4 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep