Claimant v Orange Care-Grange Lea Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The claimant was dismissed without payment of her five-week statutory notice entitlement based on her five years of continuous service under section 86 ERA 1996. She succeeded in her wrongful dismissal claim.
The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed for substantive reasons. The respondent failed to follow a fair procedure, specifically failing to properly investigate allegations of misconduct and failing to give the claimant a proper opportunity to put her case, in breach of paragraph 4 of the ACAS code of practice on disciplinary procedures. The tribunal did not find she would have been dismissed if a fair procedure had been followed and found she did not contribute to her dismissal by her conduct.
Facts
Victoria Barker was employed as Head Chef at Orange Care-Grange Lea Ltd care home from May 2019 to June 2024, working 24 hours per week. She was dismissed on 6 June 2024 without notice pay. She quickly obtained better-paid alternative employment at the Palace Hotel from approximately 17 July 2024 but voluntarily left after three weeks, claiming stress from pursuing her tribunal claim. The tribunal found she left due to pre-existing alcoholism related to personal circumstances, not solely the dismissal. She remained off work due to stress and alcoholism at the remedy hearing date.
Decision
This was a remedy hearing following the claimant's successful claims for wrongful and unfair dismissal. The tribunal awarded £1,470.80 for wrongful dismissal (5 weeks notice plus pension contributions), a basic award of £1,428.00, and a compensatory award of £982.00 (including 25% ACAS uplift). The compensatory award was limited to one week's wage loss plus loss of statutory rights because the tribunal found the chain of causation was broken when the claimant unreasonably gave up permanent alternative employment. Total award: £3,880.80.
Practical note
A claimant who secures permanent alternative employment at higher pay but voluntarily leaves for reasons unconnected to the original dismissal will have the chain of causation broken, limiting compensation to the period before securing that alternative employment.
Award breakdown
Award equivalent: 13.6 weeks' gross pay
Adjustments
Respondent failed to properly investigate the allegations of misconduct and failed to give the claimant a proper opportunity to put her case following such investigation, in breach of paragraph 4 of the ACAS code of practice on disciplinary procedures. The failure was not inadvertent as the respondent had access to legal advice. The compensatory award was uplifted by 25%.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1402352/2024
- Decision date
- 10 June 2025
- Hearing type
- remedy
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep
Employment details
- Role
- Head Chef
- Salary band
- Under £15,000
- Service
- 5 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- union