header-logo header-logo

Employment: Overstepping the mark

02 April 2009 / Michael Salter , Chris Bryden
Issue: 7363 / Categories: Features , Tribunals , Procedure & practice , Employment
printer mail-detail

Tribunals should not stray beyond their core remit. Chris Bryden & Michael Salter explain why

It is a well-established and longstanding principle of employment law that, when faced with a misconduct dismissal, an employment tribunal must not substitute its own view of the claimant's alleged conduct for that taken by the employer's disciplinary panel.

This is because it is not the tribunal's role to decide what it would have done had its members been sitting in the disciplinary hearing. Rather, it is the function of the tribunal to determine whether or not in coming to its decision the employer acted reasonably. As Mr Justice Pugsley stated in London Borough of Sutton v Kester UKEAT/0187/06/MAA (2006): “The substitution by a tribunal of its view of the matter, as opposed to looking at whether the Respondent's actions were within the range of reasonable responses, is not an empty legalistic forma. It goes to the very heart of the function of a Tribunal. Tribunals have neither the experience or the expertise nor the information

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll