A recent unfair dismissal tribunal case shows how employment tribunals look closely not only at the reason for dismissal, but also at how workplace decisions were reached over time.

In Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust v Mamode (2026), the Employment Appeal Tribunal considered whether the tribunal had been entitled to find that the Trust’s conduct amounted to a breach of trust and confidence. The case offers useful lessons for employers and HR professionals dealing with complex situations where decisions develop over a period of time.

 

Background to the Tribunal Case

Mr Mamode was employed as a consultant surgeon by Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust. Concerns were raised about aspects of his clinical practice and professional conduct. In a regulated healthcare environment, concerns of this nature are often addressed through management review processes, clinical oversight and discussions about professional standards.

In response to the concerns, the Trust took a number of steps to review the situation. This included examining the issues that had been raised, considering the impact on patient care and deciding whether changes were needed to Mr Mamode’s duties while the concerns were being considered.

As the situation developed, further decisions were taken by senior staff about his role and responsibilities. Restrictions were placed on aspects of his work and the Trust reviewed whether the employment relationship could continue in its existing form.

The Trust ultimately concluded that the situation had reached a point where his employment could not continue.

 

The Claim Brought by the Employee

Mr Mamode’s employment ended and he brought a claim for unfair dismissal.

He argued that the way the Trust had handled the situation amounted to a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. In particular, he said that the decisions taken over time, when viewed together, showed that the Trust had acted unreasonably and had undermined the employment relationship.

Cases involving senior professionals can be especially complex. They may involve a series of decisions taken over time, input from different managers and overlapping concerns about conduct, performance or professional standards. When such cases reach an employment tribunal, the focus is often on the overall course of conduct rather than a single event.

This unfair dismissal tribunal case therefore centred on whether the Trust’s actions, taken as a whole, amounted to a fundamental breach of contract and whether the dismissal could be regarded as fair in the circumstances.

 

What the Employment Tribunal Found

The tribunal examined the sequence of events leading up to the end of Mr Mamode’s employment and the way the Trust had responded to the concerns that had been raised.

In cases of this kind, the tribunal considers whether the employer had a fair reason for its actions and whether it acted reasonably in the circumstances. Where a claim involves an alleged breach of trust and confidence, the tribunal will look at the employer’s conduct overall rather than focusing on one decision in isolation.

The tribunal reviewed the steps taken by the Trust, including the decisions to restrict aspects of Mr Mamode’s work and the way concerns about his practice had been handled. It considered whether those actions, taken together, were consistent with the duty to maintain trust and confidence between employer and employee.

Although the tribunal accepted that the Trust had genuine concerns, it concluded that the way the situation had been managed meant that the employment relationship had been damaged. In particular, the tribunal concluded that the Trust’s conduct, viewed as a whole, went beyond what was reasonable and amounted to a breach of trust and confidence.

The tribunal therefore decided that there had been a fundamental breach of contract and that the dismissal was therefore unfair.

Tribunals do not decide what they would have done themselves. Instead, they consider whether the employer’s actions fell within the range of reasonable responses open to an employer in a similar situation. In this case, the tribunal concluded that the Trust’s conduct fell outside that range.

 

What Happened on Appeal

The Trust appealed to the EAT, arguing that the tribunal had not properly explained how its findings supported the legal conclusion.

The appeal focused on whether the tribunal had been entitled to find a breach of trust and confidence based on the evidence and whether it had clearly identified why the Trust’s actions amounted to a fundamental breach.

On appeal, the court looked closely at the tribunal’s reasoning. It considered whether the tribunal had properly analysed the facts and whether it had explained how the employer’s conduct, taken as a whole, justified the conclusion it had reached.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal noted that where a tribunal finds a fundamental breach of contract, it must make clear findings about what the employer did and why those actions crossed the legal threshold. Simply describing the situation as unfair is not enough. The reasoning must show how the legal test has been applied to the facts.

The appeal decision therefore examined whether the tribunal had sufficiently explained its conclusion and whether the findings it made were capable of supporting the result.

Appeal decisions of this kind are important because they clarify how tribunals should approach cases where workplace decisions develop over time and where several actions together are said to have undermined the employment relationship.

 

What This Means for Employers and HR

This case highlights a familiar theme in employment tribunal decisions. The tribunal will look not only at the final outcome but at the way the situation developed over time.

Employers sometimes face situations where concerns about performance, conduct or professional standards arise gradually and require a number of decisions to be made. In complex organisations, several managers may become involved. Actions may also be taken at different stages as more information becomes available.

However, the fact that a situation is complicated does not reduce the requirement to act reasonably.

Tribunals may look at the whole course of conduct, including:

• how concerns first arose
• what steps were taken in response
• whether restrictions or changes were justified
• how decisions were explained
• whether the employee was treated consistently.

Where the employer’s actions, taken together, undermine trust and confidence, the tribunal may conclude that the dismissal is unfair. This can happen even if each individual step appeared reasonable at the time.

For employers and HR professionals, the case shows that decisions made under pressure can still be challenged later if the overall approach is unclear or poorly explained.

 

Practical Lessons for Employers and HR Professionals

Every case turns on its own facts, but this decision highlights several practical lessons.

Record the reasons for decisions as they are made
Where situations develop over time, it is important to keep a clear record of what was known at each stage. Employers should also record the reasons for each step.

Consider the overall impact of a series of decisions
Even if individual actions seem reasonable, the tribunal may look at their cumulative effect.

Be clear about who is responsible for decisions
Where several managers are involved, it should be clear who has authority and how conclusions are reached.

Explain changes to duties or responsibilities carefully
Restrictions, redeployment or changes to role can affect trust and confidence if they are not properly justified.

Review complex cases regularly
Where concerns continue over time, it can help to step back and review the overall approach rather than treating each decision separately.

Make sure the reasoning behind the final outcome is clear
If a case reaches tribunal, the employer must show how it reached its decision and why the decision was reasonable.

 

What to Keep in Mind

This unfair dismissal tribunal case shows how closely tribunals examine workplace decisions, especially where a situation develops over time.

Concerns about conduct, capability or professional practice may involve several stages, different managers and decisions taken under pressure. When this happens, it becomes more difficult to maintain a clear and consistent approach.

Tribunals will often look at the whole course of events rather than focusing on one decision in isolation. If the employer’s actions, taken together, damage trust and confidence, a tribunal may find the dismissal  unfair even where the original concerns were genuine.

For employers and HR professionals, the case is a reminder that uncertainty does not remove the need for careful judgement. Where situations are sensitive or fast-moving, it becomes even more important to keep roles clear, record the reasons for decisions and make sure the process remains fair throughout.

Maintaining that discipline can be difficult in practice, but it is often what determines whether a decision will stand up to scrutiny later.

Full judgement available here.