In Way v Spectrum Property Care Ltd  IRLR 657 CA, the Court of Appeal held that an employer cannot rely on a warning on an employee's file that was given in bad faith, alongside later misconduct, when deciding that there is sufficient reason to dismiss. To do so would be outside the range of reasonable responses, and not in accordance with equity and the substantial merits of the case.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that a dismissal was fair despite flaws in the first stage of the disciplinary process and in the composition of an appeal panel.
In McMillan v Airedale NHS Foundation Trust  IRLR 803 CA, the Court of Appeal held that the NHS had no contractual right to increase a disciplinary sanction on a doctor's internal appeal against that sanction.
In Thomson v Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust EAT/0218/14, the EAT upheld an employment tribunal's ruling that a conduct dismissal was unfair because the chair of the disciplinary panel had no training or experience in the role, and he impermissibly dismissed for what amounted to serious but not gross misconduct. The employee had, however, failed to establish that there was any failure to make reasonable adjustments.
On this week's XpertHR Weekly, we discuss the disciplinary process in the context of potential dismissals.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that an employer was not obliged to put the disciplinary process on hold until the employee's grievance had been investigated.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to discipline.