In a recent case called Chand v EE, Ms Chand was dismissed for gross misconduct based on four separate incidents, each of which the disciplinary officer considered to amount to fraudulent conduct. Ms Chand brought a claim for unfair dismissal.
The Employment Tribunal found that the employer had no reasonable grounds for concluding that any of the four incidents involved fraud. However, it nevertheless held the dismissal to be fair because the fourth incident amounted to a serious breach of the employer’s policy.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) allowed Ms Chand’s appeal and substituted a finding of unfair dismissal, holding that:
- The ‘reason’ for dismissal is the set of facts or beliefs actually relied upon by the employer at the time of the dismissal. Here, the employer did not dismiss Ms Chand for breach of policy alone; the principal reason was a composite one based on four allegations, each treated as fraudulent conduct.
- Once the tribunal concluded that there were no reasonable grounds for finding any of the allegations to be fraudulent, the dismissal had to be unfair.
Therefore, the original Employment Tribunal had erred by focusing on what the disciplinary officer could have concluded on the evidence, rather than what he IN FACT concluded. The former was relevant only to remedy, not to liability.