An employment tribunal ruled that a solicitor was unfairly dismissed by a law firm over allegations involving Facebook.
- The tribunal found that the firm’s owner made a predetermined decision to dismiss without proper investigation.
- The solicitor effectively used her personal Facebook account to notify clients of her career move, causing ownership disputes.
- Her actions, though somewhat contentious, did not amount to poaching clients, according to the tribunal.
- The tribunal awarded her damages, addressing failures in the firm’s disciplinary process.
An employment tribunal has determined that a law firm unfairly dismissed a solicitor, following allegations that she attempted to draw clients away via her personal Facebook account. The tribunal found the firm’s owner, Terence Walsh, had made the decision to terminate Lucy Crossman’s employment ahead of a disciplinary hearing, which he chaired without maintaining an open mind.
Lucy Crossman joined Walsh Solicitors in 2016, quickly demonstrating a keen understanding of using social media for legal marketing. She sought permission to utilise Facebook to inform her former clients of her transition to a different firm, an initiative which she executed through her personal account. The firm claimed the Facebook account as its property, yet she managed the account herself, creating a point of tension between her personal and professional identities.
Upon resigning in early 2021, disputes regarding holiday and out-of-hours pay had begun to surface. While working her notice, she was informed by Vodafone that her work number would be disconnected. She took the step of updating her Facebook profile with her new personal number, a move perceived by Mr Walsh as a deliberate attempt to poach clients.
Despite Mr Walsh’s accusations, the tribunal concluded there was no evidence of client diversion by Ms Crossman. However, her unilateral decision to change her contact details without consulting her employer was viewed as undermining the trust between employee and firm. The tribunal noted that improved communication regarding the Facebook accounts could have mitigated the misunderstanding.
Mr Walsh’s belief that Ms Crossman was soliciting clients was genuine but not reasonable, primarily due to a lack of thorough investigation. The tribunal regarded Ms Crossman’s dismissal as unjust, as a comprehensive inquiry would have revealed the necessity for dialogue rather than immediate action. The dismissal was deemed an excessive response even if concerns seemed warranted.
While Ms Crossman was found to have acted without fully exploring cooperative solutions regarding her contact details, the tribunal recognized contributory negligence on her part as minor. Following this ruling, Walsh Solicitors agreed to compensate Ms Crossman £11,500 for wrongful dismissal, unlawful wage deduction, and procedural failures during the disciplinary proceedings.
The tribunal’s ruling highlights the essential need for fair and open disciplinary processes within law firms.
