Claimant v Barts Health NHS Trust
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. The claimant had confronted her secretary about a statement made in a previous investigation, causing discomfort. This occurred during the currency of a final written warning for similar conduct issues. The tribunal accepted the employer had reasonable grounds to believe misconduct occurred, conducted a sufficient investigation (including allowing cross-examination of witnesses after initial concerns), and dismissal was reasonable given the lack of remorse and the existing final written warning.
Facts
The claimant, a senior NHS consultant with 19 years' service, had received a final written warning in 2023 for performance and conduct issues. In June 2023, she confronted her secretary about a statement the secretary had made in the previous disciplinary investigation, telling her she was angry/upset about it. The secretary felt uncomfortable and attacked. Following investigation under the MHPS policy, a disciplinary panel dismissed the claimant on notice in June 2024. The appeal, heard in September 2024, upheld the dismissal.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim. While expressing some doubt whether the incident itself constituted gross misconduct, the tribunal found dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses given it occurred during the currency of a final written warning for similar conduct relating to communication with colleagues. The tribunal was satisfied the employer had reasonable grounds for its belief, conducted a reasonable investigation including allowing cross-examination of witnesses, and followed a sufficiently fair procedure despite some delays.
Practical note
An employer can fairly dismiss for misconduct that might not itself amount to gross misconduct if it occurs during the currency of a valid final written warning for similar conduct, particularly where the employee shows lack of remorse and the tribunal is satisfied proper procedure was followed.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3202170/2024
- Decision date
- 4 June 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Senior Consultant in Endocrinology and Diabetes
- Service
- 19 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister