Claimant v Proterms Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that whilst there were some functional issues with the website the claimant developed, these did not amount to gross negligence or a repudiatory breach of contract. The claimant's conduct did not disclose a deliberate intention to disregard essential contractual requirements. The tribunal concluded the dereliction of duty was not so grave and weighty as to justify summary dismissal, particularly as many issues had been resolved by the time of dismissal.
Facts
The claimant was employed as a Tech Lead/full stack developer from September 2023 to develop a new website for the respondent. He was summarily dismissed on 14 February 2024 for alleged poor performance. The respondent claimed he was negligent, lacked qualifications, and worked for third parties. Following the website launch on 8 January 2024, various functional issues arose including payment processing problems, slow loading speeds, a website crash, and failure to implement cookie consent. The respondent also brought a counterclaim for losses arising from the claimant's alleged negligence.
Decision
The tribunal found the wrongful dismissal claim succeeded. While some functional issues arose post-launch, these did not amount to gross negligence or repudiatory breach. The claimant had demonstrated sufficient skill and capability throughout most of his employment, including during the development phase. The tribunal found reasonable explanations for many issues and concluded the claimant's conduct did not disclose deliberate disregard of essential contractual requirements. The respondent's counterclaim was dismissed. A remedy hearing was ordered.
Practical note
Not all performance issues, even collectively, will amount to gross negligence justifying summary dismissal; tribunals will scrutinize whether the employer's trust had actually been destroyed to the requisite degree contemporaneously, not retrospectively.
Legal authorities cited
Case details
- Case number
- 2302983/2024
- Decision date
- 26 February 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Name
- Proterms Limited
- Sector
- legal services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Tech Lead
- Service
- 5 months
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No