Claimant v Chris Wright (Baildon) Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the respondent failed to adopt a fair procedure. The claimant was dismissed without being told what was alleged, given no opportunity to answer the allegations or put forward his version of events, and no disciplinary hearing was held. The investigation was fundamentally flawed and no reasonable employer would have formed a belief in misconduct without hearing from the claimant first. The ACAS Code was almost entirely ignored.
Facts
18-year-old HGV apprentice dismissed after incident involving his motorbike in state of disrepair. On 24 July 2024, claimant arrived at work with broken throttle cable and other faults. Manager (Mr Morton) told him he couldn't ride it home for safety reasons. Heated discussion ensued with swearing on all sides. Claimant's father collected him and bike. As claimant left, he shouted 'you're being a fucking prick' at manager. CEO Harvey King investigated next day by interviewing witnesses but never spoke to claimant or held disciplinary hearing before dismissing him by email to college and mother.
Decision
Tribunal found dismissal unfair due to fundamentally flawed procedure. Respondent formed belief in misconduct and dismissed claimant without ever hearing his version of events, breaching basic fairness and ACAS Code. No investigation interview with claimant, no disciplinary hearing, no outcome letter. Compensatory award of £2,606.78 after 20% Polkey reduction (chance of fair dismissal), 25% ACAS uplift, and 25% reduction for contributory fault. Basic award £240.80 after 30% reduction for conduct.
Practical note
Even in small informal workplaces with young employees, employers must follow basic procedural fairness: investigate properly, hear the employee's side, hold a disciplinary meeting, and explain the decision before dismissing.
Award breakdown
Award equivalent: 8.3 weeks' gross pay
Adjustments
20% chance claimant would have been fairly dismissed anyway given use of bad language to manager and potential health and safety concerns, though tribunal found dismissal was unlikely given context of workplace culture tolerating swearing and claimant's youth and upset state
Claimant's reaction when told bike was unsafe, being obstructive and swearing at manager was foolish and blameworthy, though mitigated by age, short time Mr Morton had been manager, workplace culture of swearing, and claimant being upset/crying. Basic award reduced by 30% including conduct of driving across yard with snapped throttle cable.
Serious breach of ACAS Code: claimant not informed of basis of problem, not notified of disciplinary case in writing, not given information about alleged misconduct, no meeting held, not informed of reasons for dismissal or right of appeal. Failure was unreasonable. Company had access to Peninsula advice.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1810215/2024
- Decision date
- 22 May 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- transport
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep
Employment details
- Role
- HGV service and maintenance technician apprentice
- Salary band
- £15,000–£20,000
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No