The claimants had worked at a sports centre run by the respondent and the allegations of inappropriate contact and behaviour were made by a colleague, a gym coach who worked there. The matter was investigated and the claimant was summarily dismissed, along with a colleague. Both appealed but the decisions were upheld and they issued claims in the ET. There the tribunal decided the findings of the internal investigation, based largely on silent CCTV footage, were outside the range of reasonable responses and breached the implied duty of mutual trust.

The President of the EAT, Mrs Justice Eady, finds that the ET had substituted its view of the incident in question by failing to engage with the evidence before the dismissing officer and their reasoning for the decision. They had also ignored the documentary and indirect oral evidence adduced by the respondent. Although the ET could have preferred the claimant’s live testimony it was an error of law simply to ignore the evidence relied on by the respondent. She therefore allowed the appeal.