Mr T Amachree v Royal Mail Group Ltd: 1802890/2021
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 31 August 2023 |
| Date | 31 August 2023 |
| Court | Employment Tribunal |
| Published date | 28 September 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Breach of Contract |
Case Number: 1802890/2021
1
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Claimant: Mr Tamunoemi Amachree
Respondent: Royal Mail Group Limited
Heard at: East London Hearing Centre
On: 23 and 24 August 2023
Before: Employment Judge Suzanne Palmer
Representation
Claimant: Mr Amachree appeared in person
Respondent: Ms Samantha Percival, Solicitor
JUDGMENT ON LIABILITY
1. The Claimant’s claim of Unfair Dismissal is not well-founded and is
dismissed.
2. The Claimant’s claim of Wrongful Dismissal (breach of notice provisions)
is not well-founded and is dismissed.
REASONS
Introduction
1. The Claimant was employed by the Respondent as a Long-Term Delivery
Postperson. During the period with which I am concerned, he was based at
the Respondent’s Clapton (E5) delivery office. He remained in his role there
until he was summarily dismissed for gross misconduct on 19 February
2021. His employment therefore terminated with effect from 19 February
2021.
2. In the course of his duties, the Claimant regularly drove a Royal Mail delivery
van. In September 2020, the Respondent received a complaint from a
member of the public that a uniformed postman had been seen drinking
from a can and then disposing of the can on the street before driving away
Case Number: 1802890/2021
2
in the van. The member of the public said that the can had contained
alcohol. The Respondent, having identified the Claimant as the driver of the
van in question, carried out an investigation and subsequent disciplinary
hearing, which culminated in the Claimant’s summary dismissal. That
decision was upheld on appeal.
3. In a nutshell, the Claimant claims that he was unfairly dismissed. He also
claims that the Respondent was not entitled to dismiss him summarily for
gross misconduct and that he is therefore entitled to a payment in respect
of his notice period. The Respondent asserts that the Claimant was fairly
dismissed for a potentially fair reason relating to his conduct, and further
asserts that it was entitled in the circumstances to dismiss the Claimant
summarily.
Claims and Issues
4. The Claimant’s claim form (ET1) was presented to the Tribunal on 20 May
2021. It was erroneously presented to Leeds Employment Tribunal but was
subsequently transferred to this region. The claim as originally presented
was for (a) unfair dismissal, (b) wrongful dismissal, and (c) race
discrimination. The race discrimination claim was withdrawn at a Preliminary
Hearing on 1 April 2022 and an order was made on 25 May 2022 dismissing
that part of the claim.
5. The Respondent sent a response form (ET3) to the Tribunal on 21
December 2021, disputing all the claims.
6. The case was listed for a Preliminary Hearing which was heard by telephone
on 1 April 2022 by Employment Judge Lewis. At that hearing, the issues
were identified and case management orders were made.
7. The Final Hearing has been concerned solely with the Claimant’s claims of
unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal.
8. At the outset of the hearing, both parties confirmed that the following agreed
list of issues, provided by the Respondent’s representatives on 22 April
2022, accurately and comprehensively reflected the issues which I was to
determine. I have only included those issues which relate to liability rather
than to remedy:
8.1. Unfair dismissal
8.1.1. What was the reason for the Claimant’s dismissal? The
Respondent asserts that it was a reason related to conduct,
which is a potentially fair reason for dismissal under section
98(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
8.1.2. Did the Respondent hold a genuine belief in the Claimant’s
misconduct on reasonable grounds and following as
reasonable an investigation as was warranted in the
circumstances?
To continue reading
Request your trial