Latest in Employment Law>Case Law>Simmonds v Milford Club [2012] UKEAT 0323_12_0612
Simmonds v Milford Club [2012] UKEAT 0323_12_0612
Published on: 01/03/2013
Issues Covered: Dismissal
Article Authors The main content of this article was provided by the following authors.
Legal Island
Legal Island
Background

Mr Simmonds worked as a steward for a private members’ club. He was given a final written warning after he allowed his wife to drop in the club takings to the bank when he could not get parked nearby. He was then dismissed for misconduct following another incident where he gave employees a Christmas bonus of £15.00 in cash, instead of a bottle of wine to that value as instructed.

The Employment Tribunal considered the earlier warning when determining if the subsequent dismissal was fair. The Tribunal considered the circumstances of the previous warning as there was an argument that Mr Simonds had been unaware he was breaching procedure and no written guidance was in place. The majority considered that it was reasonable to take into account this previous warning and decided the dismissal was fair. Mr Simmonds appealed arguing that the Tribunal failed to apply the correct test as to whether the final warning should have been relied upon to decide that the dismissal was fair. He contended the question was whether the warning was manifestly inappropriate. If it was, the warning should have been disregarded and the Tribunal's assessment of the fairness of the dismissal would, therefore, have been different from that which they reached.

The EAT stated that it is only where on the facts there is a real concern that a sanction may have been manifestly inappropriate that it will be necessary for an Employment Tribunal to engage in a factual inquiry and detailed scrutiny of the circumstances in which that sanction was applied. “If an Employment Tribunal has cause on the facts to consider that a material previous disciplinary sanction may have been manifestly inappropriate, it should hear evidence and decide on the relevant facts whether the sanction applied was manifestly inappropriate.” In this case, the Employment Tribunal did not do so, and the appeal was allowed. http://bit.ly/YItHFu

Continue reading

We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.

Already a subscriber?

Please log in to view the full article.

What you'll get:

  • Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
  • Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
  • 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
  • Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team

Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial

Disclaimer The information in this article is provided as part of Legal Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article. This article is correct at 01/03/2013