Claimant v Gilbert Colvin Primary School
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the claimant, a teacher with 35 years' experience, had made an inappropriate comment and gesture to a 10-year-old pupil stating she would 'whack' them, which the claimant admitted immediately was wrong. At least one child was upset enough to report it. Despite procedural concerns about the disciplinary hearing being conducted by a single governor rather than a panel, the tribunal concluded that dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses given the safeguarding breach, the claimant's failure to show contrition or mitigation, and the fact that a fair appeal process with a full panel upheld the dismissal unanimously. The tribunal found that even with procedural flaws, dismissal would have been inevitable and the claimant was 100% responsible for her own dismissal through her conduct.
Facts
The claimant was a teacher with over 35 years' experience employed since January 2019. On 11 May 2023, during a Year 6 maths class, she told a group of children she would 'whack' them and made an accompanying hand gesture, which she admitted was said in jest but immediately knew was inappropriate. At least one 10-year-old pupil (KA) was upset enough to report the incident. The claimant had a live written warning from a previous 2022 safeguarding issue. She was suspended on 24 May 2023, investigated, and dismissed for gross misconduct on 19 July 2023 following a disciplinary hearing chaired by a single governor. Her appeal to a three-governor panel was unsuccessful on 12 September 2023.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim. While acknowledging procedural concerns—particularly that the disciplinary hearing should have been before a panel of three governors rather than one, and that the chair may have pre-judged the outcome—the judge concluded that dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses for a safeguarding breach involving threatening language to a child. The fair appeal process remedied any earlier procedural defects. The claimant showed no real contrition or mitigation, and even a properly constituted panel would inevitably have dismissed her.
Practical note
A teacher's inappropriate threatening comment to pupils, even if intended as a joke, can constitute gross misconduct justifying summary dismissal where it breaches safeguarding obligations and at least one child is upset, particularly where the employee shows no real contrition—and a fair appeal can cure earlier procedural defects such as a single-person disciplinary panel.
Adjustments
The tribunal found that even if there had been procedural failings, there was a 100% chance the claimant would have been dismissed if a full panel of governors had heard the disciplinary case, as dismissal was clearly the correct sanction
The tribunal considered the claimant was 100% responsible for her dismissal on account of her own conduct
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3202315/2023
- Decision date
- 23 January 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- education
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Year 5 teacher / floating teacher supporting Year 6
- Service
- 5 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No