Grace Nicholls successful at the Employment Appeal Tribunal in Burke v The Harrow Club

Employment barrister, Grace Nicholls, successfully represented Harrow Club in an unfair dismissal appeal brought by a former employee (Burke v The Harrow Club [2026] EAT 141).

The Appellant, Mr Burke, was working as a youth worker at the Respondent’s youth club in West London. Following an altercation involving two young people the Respondent had cause to invite the Appellant to a disciplinary hearing. Three allegations were considered and each upheld resulting in the Appellant’s dismissal for gross misconduct. One of the allegations involved a failure to follow the Serious Youth Violence Incident Procedure and the administration of first aid without training or permission (and a failure to notify a trained first aider).

The Appellant brought claims in the Employment Tribunal. Employment Judge Glennie found, as was relevant in respect of the appeal to the EAT, that the Respondent was entitled to regard handing a tissue or piece of tissue to wipe blood whether dried or a modest quantity of flowing blood as first aid. The Appellant’s claim failed.

On appeal to the EAT, HHJ Tayler considered the recent cases of Chand v EE Limited [2026] EAT 17, Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Authority v Hunt [2026] EAT 123 and Kristensen v Portman Healthcare Limited [2026] EAT 127, together with Smith v Glasgow DC [1987] ICR 796.

The EAT stressed that “it is for the Employment Tribunal to apply its good sense to identify what factually is the only reason for dismissal, a composite reason for dismissal or, if there is more than one, the principal reason for dismissal” [paragraph 40]. HHJ Tayler reiterated that that was a factual assessment but if the Tribunal did not undertake that assessment, but “merely consider[ed] the categories of potentially fair reasons for dismissal, it will almost certainly go wrong” [paragraph 40]. The EAT found that the appeal was not academic and went on to consider whether, if the Respondent had acted unfairly in respect of the first aid component of the reason, that “could have rendered the dismissal as a whole unfair” [paragraph 42].

The EAT considered that the point of law which the appeal gave rise to was whether the Respondent was not entitled to conclude what the Appellant did amounted to first aid. The EAT concluded that an error of law could not be discerned; the Tribunal’s finding that the Respondent was entitled to conclude that first aid had been administered, was a finding it was open to make. The decision of the Tribunal was not perverse. The appeal was dismissed.

Grace Nicholls successfully appeared for the Respondent, instructed by Caroline Acton at WorkNest.

Read the full judgment here: https://www.gov.uk/employment-appeal-tribunal-decisions/damien-burke-v-the-harrow-club-2026-eat-141

Find out more

Grace has a busy employment tribunal practice across all areas of employment law including but not limited to whistleblowing, employment status, redundancy and capability and conduct dismissals. She has successfully secured costs orders, including a sum of £10,000 following a Final Hearing. She is described as “thorough and meticulous”, an “impressive junior” and a “superb advocate” by the directories, which she has been included in since 2023. To find out more, contact Nick Levett on +44 (0)20 7427 4908 for a confidential discussion.

News 29 Sep, 2026