Postman's unfair dismissal claim struck out after scandalous conduct at hearings
A postman with 16 years' service who took undelivered mail home on Christmas Eve had his unfair dismissal claim struck out after the tribunal found his conduct during proceedings was scandalous, unreasonable, and vexatious.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #gross-misconduct
- #undelivered-mail
- #litigant-in-person
- #strike-out
- #scandalous-conduct
- #custodial-sentence
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a postman from 31 January 2005 until 6 April 2021.
- On Christmas Eve, the claimant brought undelivered mail home and placed it in his shed.
- On 29 January 2021, police discovered the mail during an unrelated search of the claimant's property.
- The claimant was summarily dismissed on 6 April 2021 for gross misconduct: wilfully delaying mail, tampering with mail, and stealing mail.
- The claimant was convicted of wilful delay of mail and received a three-month custodial sentence.
- The claimant's conduct during proceedings was found to be scandalous, unreasonable, and vexatious.
Timeline
-
Employment started
The claimant began working as a postman for Royal Mail Group Ltd.
-
Mail taken home
On Christmas Eve, the claimant brought undelivered mail home and placed it in his shed.
-
Police discover mail
Police discovered the undelivered mail during an unrelated search of the claimant's property.
-
Letter sent by claimant
The claimant sent a letter dated 16 March 2021, which was the subject of item 16 in the victimisation table.
-
Summary dismissal
The claimant was summarily dismissed for gross misconduct: wilfully delaying mail, tampering with mail, and stealing mail.
-
ET1 presented
The claimant presented his claim to the Employment Tribunal.
-
First preliminary hearing
Preliminary hearing before Judge Jenkins to clarify claims.
-
Second preliminary hearing
Preliminary hearing before Judge Sharp; claimant's conduct noted as disruptive.
-
Third preliminary hearing
Preliminary hearing before Judge Moore to clarify victimisation claims.
-
Fourth preliminary hearing
Preliminary hearing before Judge Moore; hearing terminated due to claimant's behaviour.
-
Criminal conviction
The claimant was found guilty of wilful delay of mail and sentenced to three months' imprisonment.
-
Final preliminary hearing
Preliminary hearing to consider strike out of remaining claims; hearing terminated due to claimant's behaviour.
-
Strike out judgment
Employment Judge Moore struck out all remaining claims due to scandalous and unreasonable conduct.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether to strike out the claimant's remaining claims of unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, and direct sex discrimination because the manner in which he conducted the proceedings was scandalous, unreasonable, or vexatious.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out all remaining claims due to the claimant's scandalous and unreasonable conduct during the proceedings. The claimant had been summarily dismissed for gross misconduct after police found undelivered mail in his shed during an unrelated search. He was later convicted of wilful delay of mail and received a custodial sentence. The tribunal noted that the claimant's behaviour at hearings was so disruptive that hearings had to be terminated, and his conduct overall was found to be scandalous, unreasonable, and vexatious. No compensation was awarded as the claims were struck out.
Lessons & takeaways
- Litigants in person should be aware that disruptive or scandalous behaviour during tribunal proceedings can lead to their claims being struck out entirely.
- Admitting to conduct that amounts to gross misconduct, such as taking mail home, can severely undermine an unfair dismissal claim.
- A criminal conviction related to the same facts as the employment dispute can make it very difficult to succeed in a tribunal claim.
- Tribunals have the power to strike out claims where the claimant's conduct makes a fair hearing impossible or is otherwise unreasonable.
A case undone by conduct
This case shows how a claimant's own behaviour during tribunal proceedings can be as damaging to their case as the underlying facts. The postman, who had worked for Royal Mail for 16 years, was dismissed after police discovered undelivered mail in his shed. He admitted taking the mail home on Christmas Eve and later claimed he was unable to return it due to a leg injury and lack of phone or internet. He was summarily dismissed for gross misconduct and later convicted of wilful delay of mail, receiving a three-month custodial sentence.
What went wrong at the tribunal
The tribunal had already struck out several claims before the final hearing, including victimisation and disability discrimination. At the final preliminary hearing, the claimant's disruptive behaviour was so severe that the hearing had to be terminated. The tribunal found his conduct scandalous, unreasonable, and vexatious, leading to the strike out of the remaining claims of unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, and direct sex discrimination. The tribunal noted that the claimant had been given multiple opportunities to clarify his claims and to make representations, but his behaviour made a fair hearing impossible.
What this means for similar claims
This case is a stark reminder that tribunals expect all parties to conduct themselves reasonably. For claimants, especially those representing themselves, it is crucial to engage constructively with the process. Disruptive behaviour, repeated failure to comply with orders, or making scandalous allegations can result in the loss of the right to have the case heard on its merits. Additionally, admitting to conduct that clearly amounts to gross misconduct, as the postman did, makes it very difficult to argue that the dismissal was unfair. A criminal conviction on the same facts further weakens the claim. Employers, on the other hand, should ensure that their disciplinary processes are thorough and that they have clear evidence of misconduct before dismissing an employee summarily.
Similar cases
IT support technician's claim struck out after abusive conduct in tribunal
An employment tribunal struck out the entire claim of an IT support technician who called counsel 'a retard' and discussed evidence on Twitter during the hearing, ruling his conduct made a fair trial impossible.
Redundancy claim struck out for non-disclosure: costs of £6,853 awarded
A senior manager's unfair dismissal claim was struck out after he failed to disclose documents about his new job. The tribunal ordered him to pay £6,853 in costs for unreasonable conduct.
Claims struck out after housing officer failed to serve witness statement
A former housing officer's unfair dismissal and discrimination claims were struck out after she repeatedly failed to serve a witness statement, despite extensions and warnings. She was also ordered to pay £3,870 in costs.
Former employee's claims struck out after failing to comply with tribunal order
The tribunal struck out all remaining claims brought by a former employee against London & Quadrant Housing Trust after she failed to provide required details, despite having dyslexia.