Dismissed for making false allegations: whistleblowing claim fails
A service colleague with 15 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after making unsubstantiated race discrimination allegations. The tribunal rejected claims of automatic unfair dismissal and victimisation.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #protected-disclosure
- #race-discrimination-allegation
- #gross-misconduct
- #ethics-hotline
- #threatening-behaviour
Key facts
- The claimant worked for Asda from 19 May 2006 until summary dismissal on 26 May 2021 as a service colleague.
- The claimant made allegations of race discrimination in overtime allocation to the ethics hotline and at a grievance hearing on 16 March 2020.
- The respondent investigated and found the allegations unsubstantiated; the claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct including making false allegations and threatening a section leader.
- The tribunal found the claimant made a protected disclosure about overtime allocation but that the dismissal was for misconduct, not the disclosure.
- The tribunal held the dismissal was fair and all claims (unfair dismissal, whistleblowing, victimisation) were dismissed.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began working for Asda as a service colleague.
-
First alleged disclosure
Claimant called ethics hotline alleging race discrimination in overtime allocation; no specific evidence of content.
-
Second ethics call
Claimant made another ethics call triggering investigation of his grievance.
-
Grievance hearing
Claimant repeated allegations of race discrimination in overtime and contract hours; this was the protected disclosure.
-
Ethics investigation outcome
Gareth Woods found no evidence of race discrimination; claimant did not appeal.
-
Manager's grievance
Padraig Finnegan raised a grievance about the claimant's allegations.
-
Investigation meeting
Mr Bodi investigated Finnegan's grievance; recommended disciplinary action.
-
Disciplinary hearing and dismissal
Stephanie Lynch dismissed the claimant for gross misconduct.
-
Appeal hearing
Andrew Rae upheld the dismissal.
-
Claim presented
Claimant presented his claim to the employment tribunal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed (both ordinary and automatic for protected disclosure), subjected to detriment for whistleblowing, or victimised for making a protected act, and whether the employer's actions were reasonable.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It found that while the claimant had made a protected disclosure about race discrimination in overtime allocation, the dismissal was for misconduct—specifically, making false allegations and threatening a section leader—not for the disclosure itself. The employer's investigation was reasonable, and the decision to dismiss was within the range of reasonable responses.
- No compensation awarded as the dismissal was fair.
Lessons & takeaways
- Making a protected disclosure does not automatically protect you from dismissal for other misconduct, such as making false allegations or threatening behaviour.
- Employers can fairly dismiss for gross misconduct if they carry out a reasonable investigation and genuinely believe the employee committed the misconduct.
- If you raise a grievance or whistleblowing complaint, ensure your allegations are made in good faith and have some basis—unsubstantiated claims can backfire.
- Length of service is not a guarantee of protection if the misconduct is serious enough to warrant dismissal.
What this case shows in practice
This case illustrates the fine line between whistleblowing and misconduct. The claimant, a service colleague with 15 years' service, raised concerns about race discrimination in overtime allocation through the company's ethics hotline and a grievance hearing. The tribunal accepted that this was a protected disclosure. However, the employer investigated and found no evidence of discrimination. The claimant was then dismissed for gross misconduct, including making false allegations and threatening a section leader.
What the employer did right
Asda conducted a thorough investigation into both the claimant's allegations and the subsequent grievance raised by the manager who was the subject of those allegations. The dismissing officer considered the evidence and concluded that the claimant's allegations were false and that his behaviour towards the section leader was threatening. The appeal officer reviewed the decision and upheld it. The tribunal found that the employer genuinely believed the claimant was guilty of misconduct and that the investigation and decision were reasonable.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case is a reminder that whistleblowing protection is not absolute. Employees who raise concerns must still comply with workplace conduct standards. If an employer can show that the dismissal was for a separate, genuine reason—such as misconduct—and that they acted reasonably, the dismissal will be fair. For employees, it underscores the importance of ensuring that any allegations made are supported by evidence and made in good faith. For employers, it confirms that a fair process and a reasonable belief in misconduct can defeat whistleblowing claims.
Similar cases
Care home manager's whistleblowing claim fails as decision-maker unaware of disclosures
A care home manager who claimed he was automatically unfairly dismissed for raising concerns about resident safety lost his case. The tribunal found the decision-maker did not know about the disclosures and dismissed him for genuine belief in gross misconduct.
Area manager dismissed for editing timesheet: procedural failures led to unfair dismissal finding
An area manager was unfairly dismissed after editing a timesheet, but the tribunal found the investigation was flawed and the disciplinary process lacked proper notice. He was awarded £8,026 after reductions for contributory conduct and a Polkey finding.
Dismissed for using visitor parking permits: a flawed process that cost the council £35,000
A deputy manager with 16 years' service was dismissed for gross misconduct over visitor parking permits. The tribunal found the process unfair and awarded £35,318.56, but rejected her whistleblowing claim.
Electrician dismissed after raising asbestos concerns: whistleblowing and wrongful dismissal claim succeeds
An electrician who raised asbestos safety concerns was dismissed for alleged expense fraud. The tribunal found the dismissal was tainted by whistleblowing and awarded nearly £20,000.