Claimant v J D Wetherspoon Plc
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the dismissal was fair. The respondent had a genuine belief in the claimant's misconduct based on reasonable grounds following a reasonable investigation. The claimant's conduct included a heated exchange with a colleague, aggressive behaviour in investigation meetings, ripping up her statement, making serious unsubstantiated allegations against managers, and inappropriate comments about colleagues' sexuality and race. Dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. The claim was also dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as it was presented 53 days out of time and it was reasonably practicable to have presented it in time.
Withdrawn by claimant at a Case Management Hearing on 7 January 2025 and dismissed by judgment on the same date.
Facts
The claimant was a cleaner employed by Wetherspoon from May 2021 to March 2024. On 17 February 2024 she had a heated exchange with a colleague which was witnessed by others and viewed on CCTV by management. During the investigation her behaviour escalated: she ripped up her witness statement, made serious unsubstantiated allegations that managers had falsified documents, made inappropriate comments about colleagues' sexuality and race, and was aggressive and uncooperative in meetings. She was dismissed for gross misconduct on 12 March 2024 following a disciplinary hearing and unsuccessful appeal.
Decision
The tribunal found the dismissal was substantively and procedurally fair. The respondent had a genuine belief in the misconduct based on reasonable grounds following a reasonable investigation. The claimant's persistent insubordination, aggressive behaviour, and inappropriate comments justified dismissal within the range of reasonable responses. The claim was also dismissed as out of time (53 days late) because it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented it in time.
Practical note
Claimants who allege conspiracy and falsification without evidence face significant credibility challenges; even where a claim fails on time limits, tribunals may still determine the merits to vindicate respondents against serious unfounded allegations.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1604121/2024
- Decision date
- 26 May 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- hospitality
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- cleaner
- Service
- 3 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No