Cases4103912/2023

Claimant v Scottish Ministers, acting through their Agency, The Scottish Prison Service

16 May 2024Before Employment Judge C McManusScotlandin person

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalfailed

The tribunal found that the respondent had a genuine belief in the claimants' misconduct (disproportionate use of force on a prisoner), based on reasonable grounds (the extent of prisoner injuries shown in photographs compared to the initial Use of Force reports), following a reasonable investigation. The decision to dismiss was within the band of reasonable responses for an employer in the prison service context, where exemplary standards of conduct are required. Both claimants failed to provide adequate explanation for the extent of the prisoner's injuries during internal proceedings.

Facts

Two prison officers with 8 and 11 years' service were dismissed for gross misconduct following an incident on 18 August 2022 in which they restrained a prisoner (Prisoner X) using force. The prisoner sustained significant injuries visible in photographs taken on 22 August. The initial Use of Force reporting forms completed by the officers did not indicate events that would have caused injuries to that extent. An investigation was conducted, disciplinary hearings were held, and both officers were dismissed on 8 March 2023 by the Governor, Scott Watson, who concluded on the balance of probabilities that they had used disproportionate force. Internal appeals were unsuccessful.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed both unfair dismissal claims. Applying the Burchell test, the tribunal found the respondent had a genuine belief in the claimants' misconduct based on reasonable grounds (the discrepancy between the prisoner's visible injuries and the officers' initial reports), following a reasonable investigation. The decision to dismiss fell within the band of reasonable responses for an employer in the prison service, where exemplary standards of conduct are required. The tribunal was careful not to substitute its own view for that of the employer.

Practical note

In public sector employment where exemplary standards apply (such as prison services), an employer may reasonably dismiss for misconduct where there is a significant unexplained discrepancy between reported events and objective evidence of harm, even where direct proof of what occurred is unavailable, provided a reasonable investigation has been conducted and the employee fails to provide adequate explanation during internal proceedings.

Legal authorities cited

Shrestha v Genesis Housing Association Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 94Iceland Frozen Foods v Jones [1983] ICR 17Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd v Hitt [2003] ICR 111Foley v Post Office [2000] ICR 1283BHS v Burchell [1978] IRLR 379Clark v Civil Aviation Authority [1991] IRLR 412Polkey v A E Dayton Services Ltd [1988] ICR 142

Statutes

Employment Rights Act 1996 s.98Employment Rights Act 1996 s.118-122

Case details

Case number
4103912/2023
Decision date
16 May 2024
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
6
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
public sector
Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor

Employment details

Role
Prisoner Management Officer

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor