Claimant v P.J. Carey (Contractors) Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the claimants were summarily dismissed on 24 June 2024. The dismissal was procedurally unfair because no investigation or disciplinary process had taken place before the CEO dismissed them. A reasonable investigation had not occurred, and no disciplinary procedure was followed.
The tribunal found that the claimants' conduct amounted to gross misconduct (serious negligence in their management and oversight of the Riverside project). The respondent was therefore entitled to terminate employment without notice, and no notice pay was due.
Facts
The claimants were senior managers responsible for a complex construction project (Riverside) that they reported as profitable (c.£3.3m expected profit) until June 2024. After the lead quantity surveyor resigned, the claimants discovered and disclosed a catastrophic financial misreporting: the project was actually facing a loss of c.£4m, a £7m+ swing. At a meeting on 24 June 2024, the CEO reacted angrily and told the claimants to leave immediately, which the tribunal found amounted to summary dismissal. The claimants had been grossly negligent in failing to scrutinise inaccurate financial reporting for many months, contributing to cost overruns ultimately exceeding £14m.
Decision
The tribunal found the claimants were unfairly dismissed because no investigation or disciplinary process was followed. However, there was a 100% Polkey reduction (they would have been fairly dismissed by end August 2024) and a 100% contributory fault reduction for their grossly negligent conduct. The wrongful dismissal claims failed because their conduct amounted to gross misconduct justifying summary dismissal. Total award: £0.
Practical note
Even where a dismissal is procedurally unfair, a tribunal can reduce compensation to zero if it finds the employee would inevitably have been fairly dismissed (Polkey) and their culpable conduct was the sole cause of dismissal (contributory fault).
Adjustments
100% chance that the claimants would have been fairly dismissed for gross misconduct by the end of August 2024 had a fair disciplinary process been followed
The claimants' grossly negligent conduct in failing to scrutinise financial reporting on the Riverside project was the sole reason for their dismissals. The tribunal found their conduct was culpable and blameworthy and reduced both the compensatory and basic awards by 100% on just and equitable grounds.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2225272/2024
- Decision date
- 5 June 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- construction
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Employment details
- Role
- Regional Commercial Manager (Mr Coppinger); Regional Director (Mr McInerney)
- Salary band
- £100,000+
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister