CCTV didn't show the assault: dismissals for alleged attack ruled unfair

What this case shows in practice

Two catering staff at the John Radcliffe Hospital were dismissed after a colleague alleged he was assaulted by one of them while the other blocked the door. The CCTV footage, however, did not show the assault itself — only the employees near the scene. The tribunal found that the employer, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, had relied on a flawed investigation that failed to properly weigh the evidence.

The investigating officer did not adequately consider that the CCTV did not support the complainant's version of events, and the disciplinary decision-maker did not give sufficient attention to the employees' good disciplinary records or the inconsistencies in the accounts. For one employee, Mr Ali, the tribunal found there was no reasonable basis to conclude he had facilitated an assault, making his dismissal both unfair and wrongful.

What the losing side could have done differently

The Trust could have avoided these findings by ensuring a more balanced investigation. The investigating officer should have reviewed the CCTV footage more critically and sought to resolve contradictions between the complainant and the accused. The decision-maker should have considered whether dismissal was proportionate given the lack of clear evidence and the employees' length of service. A more thorough process might have led to a different outcome or at least a fairer one.

Why the result matters for similar claims

This case reinforces that employers cannot rely on a single complainant's account without properly testing it against other evidence. For employees facing misconduct allegations, it shows that a flawed investigation can be grounds for an unfair dismissal claim even if the employer acted in good faith. The distinction between unfair and wrongful dismissal also highlights that a procedural failure can lead to additional compensation for breach of contract.