LawReporter
Respondent won Employment Tribunal · 19 December 2023

Teacher dismissed for messaging pupil on Class Dojo: conduct dismissal upheld

A primary school teacher who exchanged personal messages with a vulnerable pupil via Class Dojo over the summer holidays was fairly dismissed. The tribunal rejected her claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination.

1 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026

Case details
  • #teacher-misconduct
  • #safeguarding-breach
  • #social-media-communication
  • #pupil-boundaries
  • #ptsd-disability
  • #hypervigilance
  • #dojo-messaging

Key facts

  • The claimant was a primary school teacher who exchanged personal messages with a vulnerable pupil via Class Dojo over the summer holidays.
  • She shared details of her ectopic pregnancy with her year 5 class during a lesson on loss.
  • The claimant was diagnosed with PTSD following an ectopic pregnancy but did not link her behaviour to her disability until the appeal stage.
  • The respondent dismissed the claimant for gross misconduct after finding four of five allegations proven.
  • The tribunal found that the respondent had a genuine belief in the misconduct and carried out a reasonable investigation into the main allegations.
  • The tribunal concluded that the dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses and the disability discrimination claim failed.

Timeline

  1. Employment commenced

    Claimant started work as a teacher at Bluecoat Meres Primary Academy.

  2. Ectopic pregnancy and surgery

    Claimant suffered an ectopic pregnancy, underwent emergency surgery, and was subsequently diagnosed with PTSD.

  3. Return to work meeting

    Claimant attended a return-to-work meeting and reported minimal PTSD symptoms; a phased return was agreed.

  4. Performance Improvement Support Plan

    Claimant was placed on a performance improvement plan, which she disputed.

  5. Occupational health assessment

    Occupational health report stated claimant had reduced emotional resilience but no functional impairment affecting workability.

  6. Summer holiday messaging begins

    Claimant began exchanging personal messages with a vulnerable pupil via Class Dojo, continuing for six weeks.

  7. Messaging discovered; suspension

    The messaging came to light; claimant was suspended pending investigation.

  8. Investigatory meeting

    Claimant attended an investigatory meeting; she acknowledged the messages were not professional.

  9. Return to work after sickness absence

    Claimant returned to work after a period of stress-related absence.

  10. Disciplinary hearing and dismissal

    Claimant was summarily dismissed for gross misconduct after a disciplinary hearing upheld four allegations.

  11. Appeal hearing

    Appeal hearing took place; claimant raised PTSD as a causative factor for the first time.

  12. Appeal dismissed

    Appeal panel upheld the dismissal, concluding that PTSD did not justify the misconduct.

The outcome

The tribunal dismissed both claims. It held that the respondent genuinely believed the teacher had committed gross misconduct by exchanging personal messages with a pupil over six weeks, sharing details of her ectopic pregnancy with the class, and breaching safeguarding policies. The investigation was reasonable, and the dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses.

The disability discrimination claim failed because the teacher did not link her behaviour to her PTSD until the appeal stage, and the respondent could not reasonably have known of the disability at the time of dismissal. The tribunal also found that the treatment was proportionate to the legitimate aim of safeguarding children.

Lessons & takeaways

  • Teachers and school staff should avoid personal communication with pupils outside of professional channels, especially over school holidays.
  • Employers must investigate misconduct thoroughly, but a reasonable investigation does not require perfection — the focus is on whether the employer had reasonable grounds for its belief.
  • If an employee believes their conduct is linked to a disability, they should raise this as early as possible to give the employer a chance to consider it before dismissal.
  • Disability discrimination claims based on 'something arising from disability' will fail if the employer did not know and could not reasonably be expected to know of the disability at the time of the treatment.

This case shows how a teacher's conduct outside the classroom can still lead to dismissal. The teacher exchanged personal messages with a vulnerable pupil via Class Dojo over the summer holidays, sharing details of her own medical history and asking the pupil to keep their conversations secret. When this came to light, the school suspended her and carried out an investigation, which led to summary dismissal for gross misconduct.

What the school did right

The school followed a proper process: it investigated the allegations, held a disciplinary hearing, and gave the teacher a chance to respond. The tribunal noted that the school had a genuine belief in the misconduct and that its investigation was reasonable. Even though the teacher later argued that her behaviour was caused by PTSD-related hypervigilance, the school could not have known this at the time — she had not disclosed the link until her appeal.

Why the result matters

The tribunal's decision reinforces that employers in safeguarding-sensitive roles, such as schools, are entitled to take a strict approach to boundary breaches. The teacher's length of service (2.5 years) was relatively short, which limited the scope for arguing that a lesser penalty should have been applied. The case also highlights that employees who wish to rely on a disability as a mitigating factor must raise it promptly — waiting until the appeal stage may be too late to influence the original decision.

What could have been different

If the teacher had informed the school earlier that her PTSD was affecting her judgment, the outcome might have been different. The school could have considered reasonable adjustments or a more supportive approach. As it was, the tribunal found that the dismissal was proportionate and fair, and the claim of discrimination arising from disability failed.