Disciplinary templates toolkit

Ramphal v Department for Transport (2019): 

Facts: In this case, Mr. Ramphal was dismissed for misconduct related to expenses claims.

Outcome: The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) ruled that HR's involvement in the disciplinary process should be limited to advice on procedure and law. The EAT found that HR had improperly influenced the disciplinary officer's decision by making significant changes to the officer's initial findings.

Key takeaway: This case underscores the importance of maintaining the independence of the disciplinary officer and restricting HR’s role to advisory functions.

Khan v Stripestar Ltd (2020): 

Facts: Mr. Khan was dismissed after a brief disciplinary hearing. During the appeal, a thorough investigation was conducted, but the dismissal was upheld.

Outcome: The EAT found that the appeal process had rectified the initial procedural flaws, rendering the overall process fair.

Key takeaway: This case highlighted the role of appeals in correcting procedural defects in the initial disciplinary process. This emphasises that a comprehensive appeal can salvage a flawed initial disciplinary process.

Collins v ILC Manchester Ltd (2021): 

Facts: Mr. Collins was dismissed after a disciplinary meeting to which he was denied the opportunity to bring a companion.

Outcome: The Tribunal upheld his claim, awarding compensation. The Employment Tribunal ruled that employees have the right to be accompanied at disciplinary hearings, even during the probationary period.

Key takeaway: Tthe right to accompaniment applies irrespective of the probationary status.

University of Dundee v Chakraborty (2022): The EAT dealt with the disclosure of grievance investigation reports.

Facts: The University amended an investigation report after receiving legal advice but did not disclose the original version.

Outcome: The Tribunal ruled that the original report should be disclosed, as it was not covered by legal advice privilege at the time of its creation.

Key takeaway: This case highlights the importance of transparency in disciplinary and grievance investigations.

Jafri v Lincoln College (2019) 

Facts: Mr. Jafri was dismissed following allegations of misconduct.

Outcome: The EAT found that the dismissal was unfair due to a lack of a fair investigation. The investigation was deemed biased and insufficiently thorough.

Key takeaway:  This case reinforces the need for impartial and comprehensive investigations in disciplinary processes to ensure fairness.