Claimant v Sir Toby's Beers Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The respondent conceded procedural unfairness. The tribunal found the investigation was inadequate and outside the range of reasonable responses—it revealed only vague unparticularised allegations, nothing was documented prior to dismissal, and the claimant was never given an opportunity to address allegations before being summarily dismissed. Had a proper investigation been conducted and allegations properly put to her, the claimant would not have been dismissed as she would have provided explanations to the vague allegations.
The tribunal found as a fact that the claimant did not conduct work for others during the respondent's time, preferring her evidence that she only worked for the respondent and took photos during breaks. Mr Plant's evidence was unreliable, produced 6 weeks post-dismissal, lacking particularity and detail. The tribunal concluded the claimant had not committed an act of gross misconduct and therefore the respondent was not entitled to dismiss her summarily without notice.
Facts
The claimant worked as a barmaid with social media responsibilities for a small craft beer company from August 2019 to January 2024. She was paid £24,500 annually and had permission since March 2022 to do social media work for other clients in her own time. On 18 January 2024 she was summarily dismissed without warning based on allegations from a colleague that she had been doing paid work for other clients during her shifts. No proper investigation was conducted and no allegations were put to her before dismissal. The respondent only obtained witness statements from colleagues 6 weeks after dismissal.
Decision
The tribunal found both the unfair and wrongful dismissal claims succeeded. The respondent conceded procedural unfairness, and the tribunal found the investigation inadequate with only vague unparticularised allegations. The tribunal preferred the claimant's evidence that she only worked for the respondent during working hours and found she had not committed gross misconduct. No Polkey reduction or contributory fault deduction was applied. Total award of £10,529.27 including 10% ACAS uplift.
Practical note
Employers must conduct proper investigations with particularised allegations put to the employee before dismissal; vague allegations gathered post-dismissal without giving the employee an opportunity to respond will render both unfair and wrongful dismissal claims successful with no reductions.
Award breakdown
Award equivalent: 22.3 weeks' gross pay
Adjustments
Parties agreed that an ACAS uplift of 10% is appropriate due to respondent's failure to follow ACAS Code procedures.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3303607/2024
- Decision date
- 22 October 2024
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- hospitality
- Represented
- No
Employment details
- Role
- Barmaid with social media responsibilities
- Salary band
- £20,000–£25,000
- Service
- 4 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No