Cases6010488/2024

Claimant v GM-Design Ltd

13 June 2025Before Employment Judge YallopSouthamptonremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalfailed

The tribunal found the reason for dismissal was conduct (bullying). The employer genuinely believed the claimant was guilty of misconduct, had reasonable grounds for that belief based on a thorough investigation, and acted within the range of reasonable responses. The incident was serious gross misconduct (threatening a junior colleague) and dismissal fell within the reasonable responses available, despite 12 years unblemished service. Procedure was fair throughout.

Facts

The claimant was an Associate Director at a small design agency with 12 years unblemished service. She was dismissed for gross misconduct after a conversation with a junior colleague (Ms Layzell) on 14 March 2024, in which the respondent found she had threatened and intimidated Ms Layzell by revealing she knew about a complaint Ms Layzell had made and telling her not to overthink things on the drive home. Ms Layzell reported feeling scared and anxious. The claimant maintained the conversation was light-hearted. The respondent conducted a thorough investigation, disciplinary hearing, and appeal with external HR support.

Decision

The tribunal found the dismissal was fair. The reason was conduct. The employer had a genuine belief in misconduct based on reasonable grounds after a reasonable investigation. The decision to treat the incident as gross misconduct and to dismiss fell within the range of reasonable responses. Despite 12 years service, the seriousness of bullying in a small, close-knit creative workplace justified dismissal. Procedure was fair throughout.

Practical note

In a small employer context, even a single incident of bullying/threatening behaviour towards a junior colleague by a senior employee can justify summary dismissal for gross misconduct, even with 12 years unblemished service, if the investigation is thorough and fair.

Legal authorities cited

Selkent Bus Co Ltd v Moore [1996] ICR 836BHS v Burchell [1978] IRLR 379Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd v Hitt [2003] ICR 111Hussain v Elonex plc [1999] IRLR 420

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.94ERA 1996 s.98ERA 1996 s.98(4)

Case details

Case number
6010488/2024
Decision date
13 June 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
2
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
professional services
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
Associate Director
Service
12 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No