For more information about unfair dismissals, contact us on 01332 226 149 or complete the form below.
Conveyancing
Explore All ConveyancingCriminal Defence
Explore All Criminal DefenceEstate Planning
Explore All Estate PlanningEstate Administraion
Explore All Estate AdministraionDispute Resolution
Explore All Dispute ResolutionFamily & Matrimonial
Explore All Family & MatrimonialMotoring & Driving Offences
Explore All Motoring & Driving OffencesResidential Property
Explore All Residential PropertyResidential Property Disputes
Explore All Residential Property DisputesWills, Trusts & Estate Disputes
Explore All Wills, Trusts & Estate DisputesAgriculture
Explore All AgricultureBusiness Recovery
Explore All Business RecoveryCharities & social enterprises
Explore All Charities & social enterprisesCommercial Disputes
Explore All Commercial DisputesCommercial Law & Contracts
Explore All Commercial Law & ContractsCommercial Property
Explore All Commercial PropertyCorporate & Finance
Explore All Corporate & FinanceData Protection
Explore All Data ProtectionDebt Services
Explore All Debt ServicesEcclesiastical Law
Explore All Ecclesiastical LawEducation Law
Explore All Education LawEmployment Law
Explore All Employment LawFamily Businesses
Explore All Family BusinessesFinance Dispute Resolution
Explore All Finance Dispute ResolutionFinancial & Business Crime
Explore All Financial & Business CrimeInsurance Litigation
Explore All Insurance LitigationIntellectual Property
Explore All Intellectual PropertyLicensing
Explore All LicensingRegulatory & Corporate Defence
Explore All Regulatory & Corporate Defence
In a recent case, the Employment Tribunal decided that a dismissal was fair in spite of the fact that a formal procedure had not been adopted.
Employment|29 September 2020
Insight
The answer is that it sometimes can be according to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in the recent case of Gallacher -v- Abellio Scotrail Ltd UKEATS/0027/19 (04 February 2020) The EAT decided that a dismissal was fair in spite of the fact that a formal procedure had not been adopted.
The employer had decided to dismiss the employment of the Claimant, who was employed as its Head of Customer Delivery and Standards, which was a senior role. Unfortunately, her working relationship had broken down with her line manager. When the Company went through a difficult period, which was described as “business-critical” by the Employment Tribunal, a decision was reached to terminate the Claimant’s employment on the grounds that the deterioration of her relationship with her line manager was an obstacle to meeting the objectives of the business.
The Employment Tribunal found that the dismissal was fair on the basis that:
“neither individual had trust and confidence in the other; that the Claimant had been “truculent” towards Ms Taggart in relation to the recruitment issue; that the Claimant had been unable to put matters behind her and move on; that longstanding issues between them remained unresolved even at March 2017; and that Ms Taggart genuinely believed that there was an irretrievable breakdown in relations”.
This was deemed to be some other substantial reason, which is a category of fair dismissals recognised by Tribunals where the employer has a substantial reason to justify dismissal but it does not fall into one of the traditional categories of conduct, capability or redundancy.
The Employment Tribunal commented that it was very unusual for there to be a finding of unfair dismissal where a formal procedure had not been followed. The Tribunal found that the Acas code did not apply as this was not a dismissal on the grounds of conduct or capability. Having decided that there had been an irretrievable breakdown in relations, the Tribunal decided that a procedure would not have made any difference to the outcome but that it could even have made things worse. As such the decision to not follow a procedure had not rendered the dismissal unfair.
The EAT agreed that it is unusual for a dismissal to be fair where no procedure has been followed. In upholding the Tribunal’s decision the EAT emphasised that this was a breakdown in relations between two senior personnel during a business-critical period.
In recent years some Employment Tribunals have been reluctant to find that a breakdown in trust and confidence can be a fair reason for dismissal on the basis that it is sometimes used where there is not sufficient evidence of misconduct. This case shows that it can be a fair reason for dismissal in certain circumstances.
This case also shows that a decision to not follow a formal procedure will not automatically lead to a finding of unfair dismissal where there has been a breakdown in personal relationships if it was reasonable to not do so in the circumstances. Nonetheless, employers should tread carefully in these sorts of cases as this case is unusual on its facts, and employers are likely to face an uphill struggle to persuade a Tribunal that a dismissal is fair where a formal procedure has not been followed.
Please note, the information included in this update is correct at the date of publishing.
For more information about unfair dismissals, contact us on 01332 226 149 or complete the form below.
Related Services


Understand employer rights when employees have second jobs, including contracts, working time, conflicts of interest and dismissal.
Read More

Download our probationary period resource pack to help prepare for the Employment Rights Act changes from January 2027.
Read More


Download expert guidance on UK trade union reforms and prepare your organisation for Employment Rights Act changes.
Read More

Employment law tips for employers managing absence, flexibility and inclusion during the 2026 FIFA World Cup.
Read More

Guidance for employers on managing workplace distraction, excessive phone use and digital overload at work.
Read More


Key April 2026 changes to trade union recognition rules and what employers should do ahead of wider reforms later this year.
Read More

Government consultation begins on NDA restrictions under the Employment Rights Act 2025, with changes expected from 2027.
Read More

Employers can voluntarily publish menopause and gender pay gap action plans from April 2026 ahead of the 2027 legal requirement.
Read More

Understand SSP 2026 updates, employer responsibilities, and common pitfalls to keep your business compliant and protect staff rights.
Read More

EAT confirms employers should assess redundancies forward-looking, not retrospectively, when deciding if collective consultation is needed.
Read More

Learn the 2026 National Minimum Wage rates, common employer pitfalls, and how to stay compliant with new Fair Work Agency rules.
Read More

ERA 2025 reforms take effect February 2026, changing industrial action rules, employee protections, and union obligations.
Read MoreScroll to next section
Scroll back to the top
