The claimant was employed as a music assistant. He was accused of sexual misconduct. He complained that he had not been allowed legal representation at the disciplinary hearing.
Held: Whilst it is standard practice for legal representation not to be allowed, where the misconduct alleged was sufficiently serious, his article 6.1 rights were engaged and the associated procedural requirements incorporated. He should have been allowed representation. There was no effective break between the disciplinary hearing and the subsequent making of an order by the Secretary of State to debar him working with children in future.
Stephen Morris QC J
[2009] EWHC 504 (Admin), Times 24-Apr-2009, [2009] ELR 206, [2009] PTSR 1291, [2009] IRLR 434, [2009] BLGR 799
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 6.1
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – J Sainsbury Ltd v Hitt; Orse Sainsburys Supermarkets Limited v Hitt CA 18-Oct-2002
Reasobaleness of Investigation Judged Objectively
The employer appealed against a decision that it had unfairly dismissed the respondent. The majority of the Employment Tribunal had decided that the employers had not carried out a reasonable investigation into the employee’s alleged misconduct . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Human Rights
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.323737