Disciplinary hearings

Case 5: The facts

Solicitor Miss Nadal was dismissed following allegations that included bullying of staff and passing information to outside parties. A disciplinary hearing was arranged, but Nadal said she could not attend because she was suffering from stress; her doctor confirmed this.

Nadal's employers adjourned the hearing once but went ahead when they believed that she was in negotiations with a new employer, stating that they did not accept she was unfit to attend.

The ruling

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that the opportunity for employees to put their case is an essential part of a reasonable investigation, except in exceptional circumstances where no explanation would prevent the dismissal. The employer's failure to allow Nadal to put her case made her dismissal unfair; it had no evidence or alternative medical opinion regarding her health, and had not been entitled to disregard her doctor's evidence.

But the EAT added that the tribunal should have considered reducing her compensation, after assessing whether she was likely to have attended a hearing at all, and whether she was likely to have been dismissed even if she had attended.

William Hicks and Partners v Nadal UKEAT/0164/05