
Vexatious grievances and unfair dismissal
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that a dismissal on the grounds of gross misconduct relating to the bringing of multiple vexatious grievances, which were not subsequently withdrawn or pursued, was fair.
Background
In order for the dismissal of an employee who has completed the applicable qualifying period of service (in most cases two years, or just one year in Northern Ireland) to be fair, an employer must be able to show that
- the reason for the dismissal was one of five potentially fair reasons, namely:
- capability or qualifications,
- conduct,
- redundancy,
- breach of statutory duty or restriction, or
- some other substantial reason; and
- that in all the circumstances (including the employer’s size and administrative resources) the employer acted reasonably in treating that reason as a sufficient reason for dismissal.
Once an employer has established that they have reasonable grounds for believing that an employee is guilty of misconduct, an Employment Tribunal must then determine whether the employer’s decision to dismiss fell within the ‘range of reasonable responses’.
If a potentially fair reason for dismissal cannot be shown, or the Employment Tribunal does not consider the decision to dismiss to be reasonable, the dismissal will be considered unfair.
Facts
The Claimant, Mr Hope, was employed by the British Medical Association (BMA) from 2014, as a senior policy advisor.
Mr Hope brought numerous grievances against senior managers which could not be resolved informally, partly as Mr Hope wished to discuss the grievances with his line manager who did not have authority to assist.
Mr Hope refused to progress any of the grievances or withdraw them. A grievance meeting was scheduled and, as Mr Hope refused to attend, the hearing proceeded in his absence.
The grievances were not upheld.
The BMA considered Mr Hope’s conduct throughout the process to be frivolous and vexatious. Mr Hope’s repeated instigation of the grievance process, without following it through, was thought to amount to an abuse of process and, further, it was considered he had failed to comply with a reasonable management instruction to attend the grievance meeting.
The BMA took disciplinary action against Mr Hope. Following a disciplinary hearing, the decision was made to dismiss Mr Hope on the grounds of gross misconduct.
Mr Hope brought a claim against the BMA, claiming unfair dismissal.
An Employment Tribunal found it was reasonable for the BMA to conclude that Mr Hope’s conduct was vexatious and unreasonable. It was held that the BMA had acted reasonably in dismissing Mr Hope on that basis. As such, the dismissal was found to be fair.
Mr Hope appealed the decision, arguing (amongst other things) that the Employment Tribunal had failed to consider whether the conduct relied upon was capable of amounting to gross misconduct in the sense of being a fundamental breach of contract.
Decision
The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that the test for determining whether a dismissal is fair or unfair involves consideration of all of the circumstances. Whether an employee is in breach of a contractual obligation is potentially a relevant consideration. However, it is only one of the circumstances to be taken into account.
It was found the Employment Tribunal had carefully gone through the stages of determining BMA’s
- reasons for dismissal,
- whether there were reasonable grounds for that belief; and
- whether the dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal held the Employment Tribunal was entitled to find BMA had acted reasonably in treating the reason for dismissal, namely the conduct of Mr Hope, as a sufficient reason to dismiss in all the circumstances.
The appeal was dismissed.
Comment
This judgment will be welcomed by employers who are faced with numerous ‘troublesome’ grievances from employees. Whilst the outcome of the claim is fact specific, and Mr Hope not wanting to progress or withdraw the grievances was a key factor for consideration, the case shows that the Employment Tribunal may find an employee’s actions in raising frivolous and vexatious grievances amounts to gross misconduct, justifying dismissal.
It is important that employers carefully consider grievances raised by employees and are clear on their findings should they consider grievances to be vexatious in nature. Particular care should be taken if a grievance may be a ‘protected disclosure’ or contain allegations of discrimination/victimisation, as this may take any dismissal beyond fair dismissal legislation and into additional protections under equalities and whistleblowing legislation.
You can read the full Judgment.
Contributors: Danielle Futcher and Sarah Maddock
This publication is intended for general guidance and represents our understanding of the relevant law and practice as at January 2022. Specific advice should be sought for specific cases. For more information see our terms & conditions.
Get in touch
Get in touch
Insights & events

Paid miscarriage leave in Northern Ireland: Expanding the right to Parental Bereavement

Local Government Lawyer: A return to Regional Police Authorities?

Umbrella company reform: what businesses need to do now

Employment Rights Act 2025: Top 5 Reforms for Retailers

Non-financial misconduct: FCA draws the line – are you ready to lead on tackling misconduct?

Rewriting the rulebook: the earned settlement model and what it means for employers
.avif)
Employment law update: Digital HR1 forms, extension to Acas conciliation, and changes to MyHMCTS

The Employment Rights Bill Shaping the details through four new consultations

Competing for talent: New guidance on avoiding anti-competitive behaviour for employers

Preparing for change: turning the Employment Rights Bill into social ESG advantage

It's not over 'til it's over: Further amendments made to the Employment Rights Bill

Quarterly update on Northern Ireland employment law October 2022

Quarterly update on Northern Ireland employment law June 2022

Quarterly update on Northern Ireland Employment Law December 2021

Quarterly update on Northern Ireland employment law June 2021

Rebalancing act: the impact of retail transformation on people and stores

Impact of flexible working on towns and cities - the market and legal considerations

Employment law across the UK: A comparative analysis

Quarterly update on Northern Ireland employment law

TLT bolsters employment expertise with legal director hire in Belfast

TLT strengthens employment team with new partner hire in Birmingham

TLT Shortlisted for Top Prizes at British Legal Awards | TLT
TLT Partner Appointed Chair of North West Fraud Forum | TLT

TLT Shortlisted for Firm of the Year at Scottish Legal Awards | TLT

TLT Wins Law Firm of the Year at Manchester Legal Awards | TLT

TLT Recognised for Two Awards at The Lawyer Awards 2022 | TLT

TLT Shortlisted for Two Manchester Legal Awards 2022 | TLT

TLT Expands Employment Services with Immigration Specialist | TLT

TLT Advises Aquis Exchange on Expansion | TLT

TLT partner Siobhan Fitzgerald appointed Employment Tribunal Judge

TLT advises Ecotricity on sale of Electric Highway to GRIDSERVE

TLT advises on international sale of UK tech innovator

Employment Law Focus - Understanding the Neonatal Care (Leave and Pay) Act 2023

Employment Law Focus flexible working and the four day work week

Employment Law Focus: The impact of AI on employment law

Employment law focus - Winter 2022 and the cost of living crisis

Employment law focus: An update on gender equality issues at work

The rise of the disability agenda - Employment Law Focus - episode thirteen

UK Utilities Case Study: Employment Law and Brexit Planning | TLT





%20%C3%94%C3%87%C3%B4%20790px%20X%20451px%2072ppi10.jpg)





%20790px%20X%20451px%2072ppi.avif)
%20%C3%94%C3%87%C3%B4%20790px%20X%20451px%2072ppi%20copy19.jpg)






















