Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

Keywords: unfair dismissal, range of reasonable responses, contributory fault

Mr Anthony was dismissed for misconduct for allegedly overstating the hours he had worked. During the company appeal process it was found that he had probably done so by mistake and the fact that he had been suffering from stress mitigated against his dismissal. However, he was still dismissed. The Employment Tribunal found the Respondent liable for unfair dismissal as his dismissal was outside of the range of reasonable responses, having consideration to the amount of time he overclaimed. However, the Employment Tribunal reduced his compensation by 20% for contributory fault. The Respondent appealed on both liability and, in the alternative, that his compensation should be reduced by more than 20%. The Respondent failed on the first ground of appeal but succeeded on the latter.

The facts in Richard & Lesley Callow (t/a Callow Building Services) v Anthony

Mr Anthony (“the Claimant”) commenced employment with the Respondent (a building services company) in July 2001. He had eight years continuous employment with the Respondent. On 8 October 2009 and 9 October 2009 the Claimant was working on a building site. He submitted time sheets for these two days which claimed he had worked half an hour more on each day than he actually had. He was therefore alleged to be deliberately submitting falsified time sheets to his employer. An investigation was carried out and, subsequently a disciplinary hearing on 28 October 2010. The Claimant didn’t attend this hearing, stating he was sick, and didn’t attend further hearings. He was finally dismissed for gross misconduct on 24 March 2010 after not attending a final disciplinary hearing. The Claimant appealed his dismissal and the appeal was held on 18 May 2010. The Claimant claimed at this appeal that he had been stressed on these days and that the incorrect timesheets were a mistake. The manager handling the appeal indicated that she believed Mr Anthony. However, she decided to uphold the dismissal.

The Claimant subsequently submitted a claim for unfair dismissal to the Employment Tribunal. The Employment Tribunal held the Respondent liable for unfair dismissal, asserting that given the manager dealing with the appeal believed the Claimant innocent the decision to dismiss was without the range of reasonable responses in the circumstances. However, the Employment Tribunal indicated that the Claimant was 20% responsible for his dismissal because of his failure to attend any of the disciplinary hearings and put his case. The Respondent appealed on both points.

The law relating to unfair dismissal and the range of reasonable responses

Under s.94(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 employees have the right not to be unfairly dismissed. There are two “branches” of unfair dismissal – procedural unfair dismissal and substantive unfair dismissal. We’ll take a look at substantive unfair dismissal in this post.

For a decision to dismiss to be substantively unfair the decision must be outside of the “range of reasonable responses” in the circumstances. Whether a decision is unfair depends on the subjective frame of mind of the person making the decision to dismiss. In deciding whether a decision to dismiss is unfair the Employment Tribunal will consider:

  1. Whether a reasonable and thorough investigation has been carried out
  2. Whether the Respondent has a genuine belief in the Claimant’s guilt
  3. Whether the Respondent has an honest belief in the Claimant’s guilt

The Employment Tribunal must not substitute its own view for the view of the manager taking the decision. Should the manager handling the dismissal or the appeal fail to, for example, have an honest belief in the Claimant’s guilt (and this is adduced through evidence) then the decision may be unfair. However, the “range of reasonable responses” test is heavily weighted in favour of the employer.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal’s decision in Richard & Lesley Callow (t/a Callow Building Services) v Anthony

The Employment Appeal Tribunal dismissed the Respondent’s appeal against liability but allowed the appeal relating to contributory fault. The Employment Appeal Tribunal decided that the Employment Tribunal’s view on liability was neither perverse nor had it substituted its own judgment for that of the employer. However, the Employment Appeal Tribunal accepted the Respondent’s appeal on the contributory fault point as the Employment Tribunal had not given sufficient reasons for its decision to place the contributory fault percentage at 20 percent. The matter was therefore remitted to the Employment Tribunal to be heard on this point.

Our specialist employment solicitors’ thoughts on Richard & Lesley Callow (t/a Callow Building Services) v Anthony

This is a case where, at first glimpse, the decision to dismiss the Claimant seems unduly harsh. However, the Claimant certainly did not help himself by failing to attend the disciplinary hearings arranged. This is an important point for Claimants: always try and attend your disciplinary hearing for if you fail to then the decision to dismiss you can be held in your absence.

Our specialist unfair dismissal solicitors deal with all types of unfair dismissal cases and are able to take no win no fee unfair dismissal cases on.

About Chris Hadrill

Chris is a specialist employment lawyer at Redmans. He specialises in contentious and non-contentious employment matters, including breach of contract claims, compromise agreements and Employment Tribunal cases. He writes on employment law matters on a variety of websites, including Direct 2 Lawyers, Lawontheweb.co.uk, LegalVoice, the Justice Gap and his own blog. Contact Chris by emailing him at chadrill@redmans.co.uk

Share →

Our awards

Request a callback

Your name

Your email

Your telephone number

Contact us

Please feel free to discuss your own position and concerns. Contact your nearest office on:

T: 020 3397 3603
E: enquiries@redmans.co.uk
W: www.redmans.co.uk


4.64 Average

28 Reviews


Excellent service from initial contact to deliverables.

Posted 4 days ago

Virginia K

Yes, Chris Hadrill answered all my questions and I feel more confident with my current situation

Posted 4 days ago


Chris Hadrill was referred to me my a friend of mine. I found the service to be efficient, quick and like Chris's direct approach to my work. Well done and thank you Chris!

Posted 6 days ago

Andy W

Very prompt & structured service that helped put my mind at rest at a difficult time

Posted 1 week ago


I have found Redmans to be very helpful, diligant and thoroughly professional when dealing with them, plus they gone that extra mile for me !

Posted 3 weeks ago


Thank you to Chris Hadrill at Redmans for his assistance in settling my case. I contacted him at the very last minute and he was happy to help me and managed to get everything done on time and in a very professional manner. I will definitely be happy to work with him again .

Posted 1 month ago

Redman's provided excellent legal employment advice for me during a difficult time in my employment. Chris was my lawyer, super efficient, quick, reliable and clearly very experienced in the matter. Could not ask for a better law firm to deal with your query if you are in need of some help. Would definitely use them again in the future. Highly recommending Chris.

Posted 4 months ago


Chris Hadrill was very professional and responsive. I would highly recommend him

Posted 4 months ago


Very Efficient, with very quick email reply’s. I had a matter that needed resolving within a very short space of time and Redmans Solicitors were great with dealing with my matter quickly.

Posted 4 months ago


At Redmans the solicitor that was dealing with me was Chris. He dealt with my situation smoothly with clear guidance and explanation

Posted 5 months ago


Clear, concise advice and guidance delivered by an experienced and very capable solicitor, within the timelines required

Posted 5 months ago


Very efficient service. I never had to wIt for more than a day for a reply to any of my queries and the matter was dealt with swiftly.

Posted 5 months ago


Very timely, thorough and helpful advice. Friendly and considerate of the needs of the client

Posted 5 months ago


Very prompt and attention to detail. Thank you for the service

Posted 5 months ago


Couldn’t be happier with how Redmans successfully handled our seemingly tricky case. By being clear and detailed every step of the way, with the utmost professionalism and courtesy, they made it an informative and eye-opening process, taking the stress out of the situation and ultimately delivered what you would want from such a service. I fully appreciate everything they have done, and if I am ever in need of such services in the future, they will be the first number I contact. Excellent.

Posted 5 months ago


Excellent work delivered with great quality

Posted 5 months ago


Chris Hadrill was a great help both in terms of his advice and his expertise. He explained my options to me clearly and concisely enabling me to quickly make the right decision for me in the circumstance. I would not hesitate to recommend Chris or Redmans to friends or colleagues, and would certainly make Redmans my first port of call should I require a similar service in the future.

Posted 5 months ago


Redmans gave excellent advice and helped me understand everything in clear concepts. Thank you!

Posted 5 months ago


Resolved my issues

Posted 5 months ago


Quick fast professional service.

Posted 5 months ago


"Prompt, efficient and practical advice that resulted in me getting some additional money tax free."

Posted 5 months ago