Re the products bought from Taylor Rigby
Didn't the groundsmen claim all orders were signed off by more senior management?
And if part of the dismissal was because the SMC were paying £20 more per unit then an online price that's also a very weak argument.
Yes, but if the senior manager relied on his expertise it would be seen as a perfectly reasonable thing to sign off. It may even have been covered in the manager's contract of employment.
Paragraph 101 says the purchases were excessive. The groundsmen were provided with a schedule of purchases but the claim does not mention any amounts. Without details of how much the SMC were spending prior to the sackings and how much they are spending now its impossible to say what "excessive" means. The bigger the difference the more likely the SMC will win at the Tribunal. Unless they prove Ehab instructed those who did the investigation and disciplinary hearings to sack them. The claim hints that may have been the case, but it doesn't provide any evidence that was the case.
