Claimant v Thorpe Hall Leisure Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Withdrawn by the claimant at the end of closing submissions.
Claim under s.10 Employment Relations Act 1999 for failure to allow right to accompaniment was withdrawn by the claimant at the end of closing submissions.
The tribunal found that while the claimant's inability to control her anger on 9 August 2023 arose from her disabilities (anxiety, depression, PCOS), her failure to acknowledge the seriousness of the incident and deflection of responsibility during the disciplinary hearing did not arise from her disabilities. The respondent justified the dismissal as a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aims of preserving its reputation and not tolerating unprofessional conduct, as no lesser sanction would ensure similar conduct would not recur.
The tribunal found that the respondent applied a PCP of terminating for conduct without seeking medical evidence. This put the claimant at a substantial disadvantage as her conduct on 9 August and her abruptness on 18 August were contributed to by her disabilities. The respondent was on notice that the claimant had recently returned from sick leave for mental health reasons and was on medication. It would have been a reasonable adjustment to seek medical evidence before dismissing her. The tribunal found an 80% chance the claimant would still have been dismissed even with the adjustment.
Facts
The claimant, a commis chef with disabilities (anxiety, depression, PCOS), was dismissed after a loud argument with a colleague on 9 August 2023 in which she shouted and swore within earshot of guests at the respondent's four-star hotel and spa. At the disciplinary hearing on 18 August 2023, she minimised the seriousness of the incident, deflected blame onto the colleague, and showed little remorse. The respondent dismissed her without seeking medical evidence, despite being aware she had recently returned from mental health-related sick leave.
Decision
The tribunal found the s.15 claim failed because, while the claimant's inability to control her anger arose from her disabilities, her failure to acknowledge the seriousness of the incident did not, and dismissal was justified to preserve the respondent's reputation. However, the failure to make reasonable adjustments claim succeeded: the respondent should have sought medical evidence before dismissing her. The tribunal awarded compensation reduced by 80% to reflect the likelihood she would have been dismissed anyway.
Practical note
Employers who are aware an employee has mental health issues should seek medical evidence before dismissing for misconduct, even where the employee does not raise their condition as a mitigating factor, or risk a finding of failure to make reasonable adjustments.
Award breakdown
Vento band: lower
Adjustments
The tribunal found an 80% chance the respondent would still have dismissed the claimant even if medical evidence had been obtained, as she continued to downplay the seriousness of her conduct and fail to take responsibility. Full losses awarded for 7 weeks; 20% of losses awarded thereafter.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3202500/2023
- Decision date
- 9 May 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 4
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- hospitality
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Commis Chef
- Service
- 9 months
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep