Pearson v Nu-Track Ltd [2017] NIIT 01800_17IT (13 December 2017)

Pearson v Nu-Track Ltd [2017] NIIT 01800_17IT (13 December 2017)

The claimant was unfairly dismissed because the employer's decision to summarily dismiss for gross misconduct was outside the band of reasonable responses for a reasonable employer, given the facts and the statutory test. The dismissal was not automatically unfair as the principal reason was not trade union...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] NIIT 01800_17IT
Parties
Claimant: Mark Pearson; Respondent: Nu-Track Ltd
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
13 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Industrial Tribunal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim partly upheld
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Trade Union Activities, Contributory Conduct, Gross Misconduct, Confidentiality
Employment Law Unfair Dismissal Trade Union Activities Contributory Conduct Gross Misconduct Confidentiality

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 27 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Pearson

Claimant

Nu-Track Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Industrial Tribunal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed under Article 130 of the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996
  2. 2 Whether the dismissal was automatically unfair under Article 136 due to trade union activity
  3. 3 Whether the claimant suffered unlawful detriment under Article 73 due to trade union activity

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant was unfairly dismissed because the employer's decision to summarily dismiss for gross misconduct was outside the band of reasonable responses for a reasonable employer, given the facts and the statutory test. The dismissal was not automatically unfair as the principal reason was not trade union activity, and there was no unlawful detriment proven. Compensation was reduced by 50% due to contributory conduct by the claimant in handling confidential information without authority.

Court Disposition

Claim partly upheld

Orders

  • Compensation of £4,161.16 awarded to claimant, reduced by 50% for contributory conduct
  • Attention drawn to Recoupment Order attached to decision