The appellant had been employed as a Staff Nurse. He was dismissed after being found to have slapped an elderly patient twice across the buttocks. That incident had been report to the Director of Nursing Services by another Nurse. He was suspended pending an investigation and as part of his investigation th edirector had gone straight in to look at the patient and he had seen a red mark on the body and concluded that was consistent with a blow having been struck by an open hand, a doctor also present reached that same conclusion. In a later disciplinary hearing it was the same Director who presided. He was informed of the charges against him and he made his case, but the director decided on the evidence that Mr Slater had lost his temper with the patient and struck two gratuitous blows, that was gross misconduct and he dismissed him. The Industrial Tribunal dismissed the complaint of unfair dismissal, they found that the disciplinary hearing was fair.
Held: Merely because a person conducting a disciplinary hearing has carried out a preliminary investigation does not mean that that person is unable to conduct a fair hearing or inquiry into events.
Parker LJ said: ‘[Counsel] for the appellant relies principally on the general principle that a person who holds an inquiry must be seen to be impartial, that justice must not only be done but be seen to be done, and that if an observer with full knowledge of the facts would conclude that the hearing might not be impartial that is enough. . .
I accept both the general rule and the exceptions [the example given was a one man firm]. The rules of natural justice in this field do not in my view form an independent ground upon which a decision may be attacked, although a breach will clearly be an important matter when the [ET] consider the question raised in s [98(4)] of the Act.’
Judges:
Parker LJ
Citations:
[1989] IRLR 16
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen v Brady EAT 31-Mar-2006
The reason adduced by the union for the dismissal of the climant was found by the Tribunal on the facts not to be the true reason for dismissal, the true reason being the union executive committee’s political antipathy to Mr Brady.
Held: It . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.276829