Studio manager dismissed for issuing free sunbed sessions: employer's investigation held to be reasonable
A tribunal has dismissed an unfair dismissal claim from a studio manager with nine years' service who was sacked for gross misconduct after repeatedly giving free sunbed sessions without authorisation. The employer's investigation and decision were found to be within the range of reasonable responses.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #gross-misconduct
- #falsification-of-records
- #free-sunbed-sessions
- #theft-of-services
- #disciplinary-procedure
- #appeal-hearing
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Studio Manager from 2 April 2013 until dismissal on 28 July 2022.
- The claimant was suspended on 15 July 2022 pending investigation into allegations of issuing free sunbed sessions without following procedure.
- The disciplinary investigation found the claimant had repeatedly issued free sunbed sessions without authority, causing monetary loss.
- The claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct, specifically theft of services.
- The claimant appealed the dismissal, but the appeal was not upheld.
- The tribunal found the employer had carried out a reasonable investigation and the dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment as a Studio Manager.
-
Suspension
Claimant suspended on full pay pending investigation into allegations of gross misconduct.
-
Disciplinary hearing invitation
Claimant invited to disciplinary hearing via letter, with evidence provided.
-
Disciplinary hearing
Disciplinary hearing held via Teams; claimant given opportunity to respond.
-
Dismissal
Claimant dismissed for gross misconduct (theft of services).
-
Appeal lodged
Claimant appealed dismissal, alleging unfair treatment and previous grievance.
-
Appeal hearing
Appeal hearing held before Managing Director Mr Primdahl.
-
Appeal outcome
Appeal not upheld; dismissal confirmed.
-
Preliminary hearing
Employment Judge Postle heard the case and dismissed the claim as having no reasonable prospect of success.
-
Judgment sent
Judgment dismissing the claim was sent to parties.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's unfair dismissal claim had a reasonable prospect of success, given the employer's investigation and decision to dismiss for gross misconduct (theft of services).
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claim at a preliminary hearing, finding it had no reasonable prospect of success.
- The employer had suspended the claimant on full pay, provided evidence in advance, and held a disciplinary hearing via Teams where the claimant could respond.
- The dismissal letter set out clear reasons, and the claimant was given a right of appeal, which was heard by the Managing Director and not upheld.
- The tribunal concluded the employer's investigation was reasonable and the decision to dismiss was within the band of reasonable responses.
- No compensation was awarded as the claim was dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers should follow their disciplinary policy and provide evidence to the employee before the hearing.
- A fair process, including suspension on full pay and an appeal heard by a different manager, can protect a dismissal decision.
- Employees should be aware that disregarding clear company procedures, especially regarding theft of services, can justify dismissal even after long service.
- Tribunals will not substitute their own judgment for the employer's if the investigation and decision were reasonable.
What this case shows in practice
This case illustrates that even a long-serving employee can be fairly dismissed for gross misconduct if the employer follows a proper procedure. The studio manager had worked for the company for nine years, but was dismissed after an investigation found she had repeatedly issued free sunbed sessions without authorisation, causing monetary loss. The employer suspended her on full pay, provided the evidence in advance, and held a disciplinary hearing where she could respond. The tribunal noted that the employer's investigation was reasonable and the decision to dismiss for theft of services was within the band of reasonable responses.
What the employer did right
The employer's actions provide a good example of a fair disciplinary process. They suspended the claimant pending investigation, which is standard practice for potential gross misconduct. They provided a bundle of evidence, including CCTV footage and free session reports, and gave the claimant the opportunity to be accompanied. The disciplinary hearing was conducted by an operations director with HR support, and the decision was clearly communicated in writing. The claimant also had a right of appeal, which was heard by the Managing Director, ensuring a different decision-maker reviewed the case.
Why the result matters
This outcome reinforces that tribunals will not interfere with an employer's decision as long as the investigation is reasonable and the decision falls within the range of reasonable responses. The fact that the claimant had nine years' service did not protect her from dismissal for gross misconduct. Employees should understand that disregarding clear company policies, especially those relating to theft of services, can lead to dismissal regardless of length of service. For employers, this case highlights the importance of following a fair procedure and documenting each step.
Similar cases
Dismissed for causing injury to colleague: gross misconduct dismissal upheld
A commercial bodywork engineer who removed a piece of GRP without checking his surroundings, causing a colleague to suffer a fractured orbital bone, was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct. The tribunal found the employer acted reasonably.
Healthcare consultant dismissed for gross misconduct after customer complaints: race discrimination claims rejected
A healthcare consultant with 6 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct following four customer complaints about his attitude. The tribunal also rejected his claims of race discrimination and victimisation.
Paramedic with 27 years' service dismissed for bullying: tribunal upholds decision
A London Ambulance Service paramedic who was dismissed for bullying colleagues after failing a mask fit test has lost her unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found the employer's investigation was thorough and the decision reasonable.
Subcontractor manager dismissed for failing to pass on penalty costs: unfair dismissal claim rejected
A subcontractor manager with four years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after failing to pass on penalty costs to subcontractors. Her claims for unfair dismissal, disability discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments were all rejected.
