Dismissal in breach of procedure

Case 6: The facts

Complaints were made about Mrs Foster's work and attitude. Foster for her part claimed she was being bullied. She was then off sick due to stress and never returned to work. Her employers made a number of attempts to resolve the situation through mediation but Foster always chose not to attend. She was dismissed in breach of procedure.

The ruling

The EAT held that Foster had been unfairly dismissed. No reasonable employer would have dispensed with the relevant procedure nor taken the view that to follow the procedure would be a waste of time. Foster's "attitude" was something potentially capable of change. The EAT said that although it had contributed about 90% to her dismissal, the only circumstances where a tribunal could reduce an award by 100% would be where the employee's conduct has wholly caused the dismissal.

* Foster v Somerset County Council EAT/0355/03

Case 7: The facts

Mr Gibbs falsely claimed overnight expenses and was dismissed.

The ruling

The EAT held that while it is recommended that employees be given the right to be heard before dismissal it is not a necessity, if in the circumstances a reasonable employer acting reasonably would have decided that the hearing was not necessary. The fact that this would mean that the employer is not complying with the code of practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures published by conciliation service ACAS, which recommend a hearing, does not itself make any dismissal unfair.

* Gibbs v MOD EAT/0423/02