Enquiry unit advisor dismissed for abusive messages: premeditated conduct justified dismissal
An enquiry unit advisor who sent threatening WhatsApp messages and emails to his line manager was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct. The tribunal rejected claims of disability discrimination.
1 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
- #gross-misconduct
- #abusive-messages
- #premeditated-conduct
- #mental-health-mitigation
- #occupational-health
- #civil-service-code
Key facts
- The claimant sent abusive WhatsApp messages and emails to his line manager, including threats about drowning the manager's family in lakes of blood.
- The claimant admitted the messages were premeditated and designed to get him reported to HR to raise concerns about understaffing.
- The claimant had a history of depression and had been coming off his medication erratically at the time of the misconduct.
- The respondent referred the claimant to occupational health, which reported mood swings and irritability as possible side effects of medication withdrawal.
- The claimant did not provide medical evidence linking his disability to the misconduct, and the tribunal found no such link established.
- The tribunal found the dismissal was fair and within the range of reasonable responses for gross misconduct.
Timeline
-
Employment started
The claimant began working as an enquiry unit advisor for the respondent.
-
Started coming off medication
The claimant began erratically reducing his antidepressant medication (Mirtazapine) without medical supervision.
-
Laptop breakdown
The claimant's laptop broke down, taking about five days to resolve.
-
Left work early
The claimant stopped work early at about 3pm, leading to a discussion about potential disciplinary action for going absent without leave.
-
Sent abusive WhatsApp message
While on holiday in France, the claimant sent a WhatsApp message to his line manager containing personal abuse and a threat about drowning the manager's family in lakes of blood.
-
Sent abusive email
The claimant sent an incoherent email to his manager's manager, further abusing his line manager and alleging a colleague was malingering.
-
Further email to manager's manager
The claimant emailed Mr Oaks, downplaying the messages as 'football banter' and referencing a Conan the Barbarian quote.
-
Returned to work and investigation started
The claimant returned from leave; Miss Sotherton was appointed as decision-maker for the investigation.
-
Suspension
The claimant was suspended pending investigation.
-
Investigation meeting
The claimant attended an investigation meeting with his union representative, admitting the messages were calculated to get reported.
-
Occupational health report received
The respondent received an OH report stating the claimant was fit to work, with possible mood swings and irritability from medication withdrawal.
-
Dismissal meeting
The claimant attended a disciplinary meeting; Miss Sotherton decided to dismiss him for gross misconduct.
-
Appeal meeting
The claimant's appeal was heard by Miss Jones; the union representative raised the link between medication withdrawal and misconduct.
-
Appeal dismissed
Miss Jones upheld the dismissal, finding the claimant was responsible for his actions.
-
Claim presented to tribunal
The claimant presented his claim for unfair dismissal and disability discrimination.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's dismissal for sending abusive messages was unfair and whether the dismissal amounted to discrimination arising from disability under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed both claims. It found that the respondent had a genuine belief in the claimant's gross misconduct based on a reasonable investigation, and that dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses for an employee with two years' service.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had not established that his disability (depression) caused the misconduct. The occupational health report noted possible mood swings from medication withdrawal, but the claimant admitted the messages were premeditated and not driven by his condition. The discrimination claim therefore failed.
No compensation was awarded as the claims were dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Premeditated misconduct, such as sending abusive messages to escalate a grievance, is likely to justify dismissal even if the employee has mental health issues.
- Employees who rely on disability as a defence for misconduct must provide medical evidence linking the condition to their actions.
- Employers should still follow a fair process, including obtaining occupational health advice, but can dismiss for gross misconduct if the investigation is reasonable.
- Length of service matters: a shorter-serving employee may receive less procedural protection than a long-serving one.
A calculated act, not a cry for help
This case shows the limits of mental health mitigation in misconduct cases. The claimant, an enquiry unit advisor with two years' service, sent his line manager a WhatsApp message threatening to drown his family in lakes of blood, followed by an abusive email. He later admitted the messages were premeditated – he wanted to be reported to HR to raise concerns about understaffing.
The tribunal accepted that the claimant had depression and was coming off his medication erratically, but found no evidence that his condition caused the outburst. An occupational health report noted possible mood swings, but the claimant's own admission of calculation undermined any link to his disability.
What the employer did right
The respondent suspended the claimant, held an investigation meeting with his union representative present, obtained an occupational health report, and gave him a fair disciplinary hearing. The decision-maker considered the claimant's mental health but concluded the conduct was too serious to overlook. The appeal was also properly considered.
What this means for similar claims
Employees who use abusive language or threats, even in the context of a workplace dispute, face a high risk of dismissal. To succeed in a discrimination claim, they must show their disability caused the behaviour – not just that they have a disability. Employers who follow a thorough process and consider medical evidence are likely to defend such claims successfully.
This case also highlights that premeditation can outweigh mitigation. The claimant's admission that he planned the messages to trigger a complaint was fatal to his case.
Similar cases
37-year Ministry of Defence engineer unfairly dismissed over mental health absence
A mechanical engineer with 37 years' service was unfairly dismissed for unauthorised absence after the Ministry of Defence failed to consider his mental health. He was awarded £19,710.
Civil servant who resigned after Facebook investigation loses constructive dismissal claim
A Disability Employment Advisor Leader with 18 years' service resigned after being referred for gross misconduct over Facebook posts. The tribunal found the Department for Work and Pensions acted reasonably.
Bus driver dismissed for exaggerating back pain after covert surveillance: dismissal fair
A bus driver with 14 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after covert footage showed her driving and shopping while on sick leave for back pain. The tribunal rejected her unfair dismissal claim.
Dismissed over a private Facebook post: when does social media cross the line?
A care worker was sacked for gross misconduct after a Facebook comment about a colleague. The tribunal found the dismissal unfair — but reduced compensation by 25% for contributory conduct.