The claimant appealed against a finding that he had not been unfairly dismissed. He said that the procedure adopted had been unfair, since he had not had opportunity to see the statements provided to his employer by independent witnesses of the incident under complaint.
Held: It can be enough in a disciplinary case for an employee to know the gist of the case against him and in such cases it may not infringe the principles of fairness to fail to provide the detailed evidence: ‘The question in a case of dismissal for misconduct such as this is whether there has been a fair and reasonable investigation of the alleged misconduct before a decision is made to dismiss or not to dismiss. In this case there was no contractual requirement that a particular procedure should be followed, other than it should be fair. There is no universal requirement of natural justice or general principle of law that an employee must be shown in all cases copies of witness statements obtained by an employer about the employee’s conduct. It is a matter of what is fair and reasonable in each case. ‘
Judges:
Mummery LJ
Citations:
[1999] EWCA Civ 1009, [1999] IRLR 420
Links:
Statutes:
Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978 57(3)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Hussain v Elonex Plc EAT 25-Apr-1996
. .
Mentioned – Linfood Cash and Carry v Thomson EAT 1989
One employee had informed his employer that a fellow employee had stolen two books of credit notes. He refused to allow his identity to be disclosed for fear of reprisals. The Tribunal had held that the dismissal was unfair because although the . .
Cited – Louies v Coventry Hood and Seating Co EAT 1990
An employer’s dismissal procedure need not be prima facie unfair if the employee was not permitted to know the contents of statements on which the employer would rely in taking a decision to dismiss or confirm a previous dismissal. Wood J said: ‘It . .
Cited – Bentley Engineering Co Ltd v Mistry EAT 1978
In employment disciplinary proceedings, natural justice required that a man should have a chance to state his own case and to know sufficiently what was being said against him, so that he could put forward his own case properly.
Slynn J said: . .
Cited by:
Cited – A v B EAT 14-Nov-2002
The claimant worked as a residential social worker. Allegations were made against him of inappropriate behaviour with a child. The girl’s allegations varied. A criminal investigation took place but insufficient evidence was found. The investigation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.145924