In the case of Mr. C M v Chelsea Football Club Ltd. Mr CM, who is a lifelong fan of the club, had accused his boss Mr JG of grabbing his crotch and threatening to kill him at a Christmas Party.
The tribunal heard that Mr CM, infuriated after Mr JG kept his job despite submitting a grievance and appeal to the club’s hierarchy, sent 1,500 anonymous emails to other teams accusing Chelsea of condoning bullying.
However, he was immediately sacked after Chelsea bosses realised that the anonymous emails – titled ‘Chelsea Football Club Scandal – Cover up Assault and Sexual Assault’ – shared spelling mistakes that Mr CM made in his workplace messages.
A judge ruled that Mr CM was unfairly sacked by the club, but refused to give him compensation as they are ‘certain’ he would have been dismissed by the Premier League club if it had given him a disciplinary hearing as required.
Employment Judge Antoine Tinnion said although Mr CM’s emails had used ‘undoubtedly rude, intemperate, and hostile language’ they did not justify his dismissal without a disciplinary hearing.
It was noted he had ‘detailed knowledge of IT security’ which gave him the ‘technical capability’ of sending the emails.
He continued: ‘The tribunal is satisfied that CFC did not conduct a fundamentally fair disciplinary process (CFC conceded that its own policies normally require the holding of a disciplinary hearing) and that – looked at in the round – Mr CM’s dismissal was unfair and out with the band of reasonable responses.
‘Having found his dismissal was unfair because of serious procedural failings, the tribunal is satisfied that had CFC applied a fair procedure, it is certain that CFC would still have dismissed Mr CM (and done so fairly) because CFC would reasonably have found him to have been the sender of the anonymous emails (or responsible for their sending).’
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
