Common unreasonable responses
UDO provides common unreasonable responses — the key test whether your dismissal was fair or unfair. Under subsection two of s98 1996 the employer most commonly identifies the following grounds of dismissal: capability, qualification, performance or misconduct. What really matters is not whether you are guilty or not, but whether the employer responded reasonably — taking into account all the circumstances and its resources — when using that reason for your dismissal.
Below you will find the common cases with clear examples of what was unreasonable — and how to approach your case.
Common misconduct
-
The Acas Code isn’t a win/lose switch
-
Unfair dismissal rarely stands alone — pick the right legal basis
-
Proportionality & consistency are your leverage
-
Documents beat opinions — build your trail
-
Your appeal is your best second chance
Unfair dismissal isn’t about “guilt” — gross misconduct.
Gross misconduct unfair dismissals aren’t about guilt but about whether the employer (1) held an honest belief you committed the misconduct, (2) on reasonable grounds, (3) after a reasonable investigation — and even if all three boxes are ticked, it’s then measured against subsection (4) of section 98 ERA 1996. It’s a two-angle approach, and even if you genuinely believe you committed misconduct, reading our full guide may change your mind.
It isn’t about “guilt” — it’s about reasonableness (ERA 1996 s.98(4))
Helvetica Light is an easy-to-read font, with tall and narrow letters, that works well on almost every site.
Legal Basis of Unfair Dismissal Cases
Connect with Us
Join the Conversation
