South Wales Fire and Rescue Service

Case Summary

Both claimants, Gareth Hancock and Daniel Phillips, were found to have been unfairly dismissed by their former employer, South Wales Fire and Rescue Service. No compensation details are provided.

The tribunal found that the claimants were dismissed without fair procedure or substantive justification by their employer, South Wales Fire and Rescue Service.

Use these claim-type pages to compare this decision with other published tribunal cases, outcome patterns, and visible award data.

• •Unfair Dismissal

Case Nos: 1602799/2023 1602819/2023 RESERVED JUDGMENT - 1 - EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS BETWEEN CLAIMANTS RESPONDENT GARETH HANCOCK (1) DANIEL PHILLIPS (2) V SOUTH WALES FIRE & RESCUE SERVICE JUDGMENT OF THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL HELD AT: CARDIFF ON: 15, 16, 17 & 18 JULY 2024 BEFORE: EMPLOYMENT JUDGE S POVEY (SITTING ALONE) REPRESENTATION: FOR THE CLAIMANTS: FOR THE RESPONDENT: MR POLLITT (COUNSEL) MISS WILLIAMS (COUNSEL) RESERVED JUDGMENT 1. The First Claimant’s complaint of unfair dismissal is made out and succeeds. 2. The Second Claimant’s complaint of unfair dismissal is made out and succeeds. REASONS 1. These are claims by Gareth Hancock (‘the First Claimant’) and Daniel Phillips (‘the Second Claimant) against their former employer, South Wales Fire and Rescue Service (‘the Respondent’). Case Nos: 1602799/2023 1602819/2023 RESERVED JUDGMENT - 2 - 2. Both Claimants bring complaints that they were unfairly dismissed by the Respondent. The claims were issued separately but consolidated by the Tribunal on 13 March 2024. Following a case management hearing on 17 April 2024, case management directions were issued and a List of Issues agreed. 3. It was not in dispute that the Respondent dismissed the Claimants or that the reasons for those dismissals related to allegations of gross misconduct. However, the Claimants argued that the decisions to dismiss them were both substantively and procedurally unfair. 4. The claims related to the events of 2 June 2023 and the Respondent’s subsequent investigations and actions in response, which culminated with both Claimants being summarily dismissed for gross misconduct. The Hearing 5. In the course of the hearing, I heard evidence from each Claimant. For the Respondent, I heard from Dean Loader (Assistant Chief Fire Officer),…