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.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- Mr Tweedale worked for the respondent for over 26 years as site manager.
- He was summarily dismissed on 27 April 2022 for alleged gross misconduct.
- The principal reason for dismissal was the breakdown of the relationship between the owner and his son, not Mr Tweedale's conduct.
- The tribunal found the dismissal procedurally unfair and that the employer failed to follow the ACAS Code.
- Mr Tweedale was awarded £51,785 in total compensation, including a 25% uplift for failure to follow the ACAS Code and a 25% reduction for contributory fault.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Mr Tweedale began working for the respondent as a site manager.
-
Mr Tweedale suffered a stroke
He had a major stroke, after which he continued working with adjustments.
-
First dismissal and reinstatement
Mr Tweedale was dismissed over the Number 27 issue but reinstated two days later.
-
Termination of Phillip Downs' contract
The owner terminated the arrangement with his son, Phillip Downs.
-
Summary dismissal
Mr Tweedale was summarily dismissed by letter citing several misconduct allegations.
-
Second dismissal letter
A further letter confirmed dismissal and added a new allegation of illegal subletting.
-
Eviction from chalet
Mr and Mrs Tweedale were evicted from chalet 27.
-
Hearing day 1
The employment tribunal hearing commenced via video.
-
Hearing day 2
The hearing concluded and judgment was reserved.
-
Judgment issued
The tribunal found unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal, awarding compensation.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer acted reasonably in dismissing the site manager for gross misconduct, given the long service and the underlying family dispute.
The outcome
The tribunal found that the dismissal was procedurally unfair and that the employer had not acted reasonably. The real reason for dismissal was the breakdown of the relationship between the owner and his son, not the employee's conduct.
Compensation breakdown:
- Basic award: £11,991
- Compensatory award: £33,020
- Wrongful dismissal (notice pay): £5,832
- Holiday pay: £942
- Total: £51,785
- A 25% reduction was applied for contributory fault.
Lessons & takeaways
- Long-serving employees are entitled to a fair process, even if there are allegations of misconduct.
- Employers must ensure that the reason for dismissal is genuinely about the employee's conduct, not personal or family disputes.
- Failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice can result in a 25% uplift in compensation.
- Employees should be given a chance to respond to allegations before a decision to dismiss is made.
This case highlights the importance of fair procedure, especially for long-serving employees. The site manager had worked for the company for 26 years and was dismissed after a dispute between the owner and his son. The tribunal found that the real reason for dismissal was the breakdown of that relationship, not the employee's conduct.
What went wrong
The employer failed to carry out a proper investigation and did not give the employee a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations. The tribunal noted that the employer did not follow the ACAS Code of Practice, which led to a 25% uplift in compensation. The employee was also awarded notice pay and holiday pay.
Why this matters
This case is a reminder that employers cannot use misconduct allegations as a pretext for dismissing an employee when the real reason is a personal or family dispute. Even if there are genuine concerns about conduct, a fair process must be followed. For employees, it shows that long service can strengthen a claim for unfair dismissal, and that failing to follow the ACAS Code can increase compensation.
Similar cases
Maintenance manager unfairly dismissed: ACAS uplift and Polkey reduction applied
A maintenance manager with 6 years' service was unfairly dismissed after a flawed disciplinary process. The tribunal awarded £8,455, applying a 20% ACAS uplift, a 25% Polkey reduction, and a 20% contributory fault reduction.
Cleaners dismissed for alleged misconduct without any disciplinary meeting: unfair dismissal
Two cleaners were unfairly dismissed after their employer accused them of gross misconduct but failed to hold a disciplinary hearing or give details of the allegations. The tribunal awarded over £9,600 in compensation.
Warehouse operative unfairly dismissed after mitigation ignored in conduct case
An employment tribunal found ASDA unfairly dismissed a warehouse operative with 18 years' service after failing to investigate his mitigation evidence, awarding £14,817 in compensation.
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.