EE Loses Unfair Dismissal Appeal Over 'Fraud' Claim Against Long-Serving Employee
A tribunal's decision to uphold an employee's dismissal for gross misconduct has been overturned.
• public
EE Loses Appeal as Tribunal Finds Dismissal Unfair
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has ruled that EE Ltd unfairly dismissed a senior customer advisor, overturning a previous tribunal's decision. The employee, who had 16 years of unblemished service, was dismissed for gross misconduct based on four alleged incidents.
The Employment Tribunal had initially found that EE did not have a reasonable basis to conclude that any of the four incidents amounted to fraud, the primary reason for dismissal. However, it still deemed the dismissal fair because one incident constituted a serious policy breach. The employee appealed this decision, arguing that the tribunal failed to recognise the dismissal was based on a composite reason, with key elements not being reasonably held.
Tribunal's Decision Overturned
The EAT agreed with the employee. Lord Fairley, President of the EAT, stated that it's crucial to consider the subjective reason for dismissal, meaning what the decision-maker actually decided, not what they could have decided. The tribunal had not made a finding that the single policy breach was the principal reason for dismissal. Crucially, it was found that a key element of the employer's reasoning – a belief in fraud – was not held on reasonable grounds.
The respondent, EE Ltd, had cross-appealed, arguing the original tribunal erred in finding no reasonable basis for the fraud belief. The EAT dismissed this cross-appeal, confirming that the original tribunal's analysis of the evidence was thorough and respected. However, on the main appeal, the EAT found that neither the dismissing manager nor the appeal manager had a reasonable basis to conclude the employee had acted fraudulently. As fraud was a key part of both the dismissal and appeal refusal decisions, the EAT concluded that the dismissal was unfair.
Remitted for Remedy Hearing
The EAT has substituted the original tribunal's judgment, finding that the claimant was unfairly dismissed. The case has now been remitted to the Employment Tribunal to determine the appropriate remedy for the employee.
Read the entire judgment here: Elizabeth Chand v EE Ltd [2026] EAT 17
