Senior bookseller dismissed without notice after 13 years: procedural failings led to unfair dismissal
A senior bookseller with 13 years' service was unfairly dismissed after being summarily dismissed during an investigation meeting. The tribunal awarded £11,471.80, including a 12.5% uplift for failing to follow the ACAS Code.
1 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
- #long-service
- #grievance-history
- #acas-code-uplift
- #polkey-reduction
- #wrongful-dismissal
- #race-discrimination-dismissed
- #religion-discrimination-dismissed
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a bookseller from 22 September 2008 until his summary dismissal on 3 February 2022.
- The respondent conceded liability for unfair dismissal due to procedural failings at the dismissal meeting.
- The claimant's claims for race and religious discrimination were dismissed as not well-founded.
- The claimant's claim for wrongful dismissal succeeded because his conduct did not amount to a repudiatory breach.
- The tribunal applied a Polkey reduction limiting the compensatory award to six months' loss.
- The respondent failed to follow the ACAS Code, resulting in a 12.5% uplift on the compensatory award and wrongful dismissal damages.
Timeline
-
Employment commenced
Claimant started work as a bookseller at Waterstones Gower Street branch.
-
Proposed move to Finchley store
Informal discussion about moving claimant to Finchley store; claimant objected.
-
Grievance outcome on Finchley move
Grievance not upheld; move to Finchley confirmed but later retracted on appeal.
-
Complaints from female colleagues
Two female staff complained about claimant's conduct; one complaint pursued.
-
Final written warning issued
Claimant received final written warning for sending inappropriate text messages.
-
Proposed move to Economist Bookshop
Claimant asked to return from furlough at a different store; he objected.
-
Move to Ship-from-Shop (SFS) role
Claimant was permanently placed in SFS duties; he raised a grievance.
-
Friday working dispute
Claimant was rostered to work on a Friday despite his religious observance; he contacted ACAS.
-
First Employment Tribunal claim filed
Claimant submitted claim for discrimination and breach of contract.
-
Summary dismissal
Claimant was summarily dismissed during an investigation meeting without notice or representation.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's summary dismissal for alleged misconduct was unfair, whether he was wrongfully dismissed (without notice), and whether he had been discriminated against on grounds of race or religion.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the claimant's unfair dismissal claim, with the employer having conceded liability for procedural failings. The wrongful dismissal claim also succeeded because the claimant's conduct did not amount to a repudiatory breach of contract.
Compensation breakdown:
- Basic award: £1,996.80
- Compensatory award: £5,799.35 (subject to Polkey reduction limiting to six months' loss)
- ACAS Code uplift (12.5%): applied to compensatory award and wrongful dismissal damages
- Total damages: £11,471.80
Lessons & takeaways
- Long-serving employees are entitled to a fair process before dismissal, including the right to be accompanied at a disciplinary meeting.
- Summary dismissal should only be used for gross misconduct; if the conduct is not clearly repudiatory, notice pay may be due.
- Failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice can result in an uplift of up to 25% on compensation.
- Tribunals may apply a Polkey reduction if a fair dismissal was likely, limiting compensation to the period it would have taken to dismiss fairly.
This case illustrates how procedural failings can turn a potentially fair dismissal into an unfair one, even where the employer has concerns about an employee's conduct. The claimant, a senior bookseller with 13 years' service, was summarily dismissed during an investigation meeting without being given the chance to have representation or to respond properly to the allegations. The employer later conceded that the dismissal was procedurally unfair.
What went wrong
The employer's main error was conducting a dismissal during what was supposed to be an investigatory meeting. This denied the claimant a fair opportunity to present his side. The tribunal also found that the claimant's conduct did not amount to gross misconduct, so summary dismissal was inappropriate. The employer could have avoided this by following a proper disciplinary process, including giving notice of the meeting, allowing representation, and considering whether the conduct warranted dismissal or a lesser sanction.
Why the result matters
The case reinforces that even when an employer believes it has good reason to dismiss, the process must be fair. The tribunal's application of a Polkey reduction (limiting compensation to six months) shows that a fair dismissal might have been possible, but the procedural failures still made the dismissal unfair. The 12.5% ACAS Code uplift also highlights the importance of following statutory guidance. For employees, this case demonstrates that long service and a lack of clear gross misconduct can support claims for both unfair and wrongful dismissal.
Similar cases
Managing director with 31 years' service dismissed without process: unfair and wrongful dismissal
A managing director with 31 years' service was unfairly and wrongfully dismissed after being told his employment was ending at a hotel meeting, with no prior investigation or disciplinary process. The tribunal awarded £61,625.82.
Whistleblower dismissed in flawed redundancy process: ACAS uplift adds 25% to compensation
A former employee was unfairly dismissed after making a protected disclosure about health and safety. The tribunal awarded over £50,000, including a 25% uplift for the employer's failure to follow the ACAS Code of Conduct.
Site manager with 26 years' service unfairly dismissed after owner's family dispute
A site manager with 26 years' service was unfairly dismissed for alleged gross misconduct after a breakdown in the relationship between the owner and his son. The tribunal awarded £51,785, including a 25% uplift for failing to follow the ACAS Code.
Procedurally unfair dismissal but no compensation due to Polkey reduction
A former employee was unfairly dismissed by Sharps Bedrooms Limited, but received only £1,502.32 after the tribunal found he would have been dismissed anyway if a fair procedure had been followed.