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.
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.
The Court of Appeal has revisited the issue of warnings and confirmed that a warning given in bad faith cannot be relied on to justify a dismissal.
In Shrestha v Genesis Housing Association Ltd  IRLR 399 CA, the Court of Appeal held that an employer's investigation into an employee's inflated mileage claims was reasonable, even though it had not investigated in detail every implausible explanation offered by the employee.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that a dismissal was procedurally unfair because the chair of the disciplinary panel had no experience or training in conducting disciplinary hearings. This led to the disciplinary panel misapplying the disciplinary procedure, and in these circumstances, the EAT found the dismissal was also substantively unfair.
A model letter inviting an employee to attend a final disciplinary appeal hearing where the employer offers more than one level of appeal.
A model order of proceedings for a disciplinary appeal hearing.
A model letter inviting an employee to attend a disciplinary hearing.
A model letter inviting an employee to attend a disciplinary appeal hearing.
A model order of proceedings for a disciplinary hearing.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to discipline.