Dismissal without a meeting was fair

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that a dismissal was fair, despite the dismissing manager not meeting directly with the employee.

In Charalambous v National Bank of Greece [2023] EAT 75, the claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct connected to a data breach.

The process involved meetings with the claimant, described as disciplinary meetings, but which the Employment Tribunal (ET) found were investigatory. It also concluded the claimant was able to put forward her “mitigation” in the course of these meetings.

The investigating manager sent his notes to the dismissing manager, who decided to dismiss summarily, based on the papers and without meeting Ms Charalambous.

She appealed the dismissal and took part in an appeal meeting, at which the decision was upheld.

She brought various claims in the ET, which were dismissed. The appeal to the EAT was on the fairness of the dismissal. The EAT rejected the appeal, finding that the earlier case of Budgen & Co v Thomasdidn’t mean a dismissal would always be unfair if a dismissing manager didn’t meet with an employee.

The key issue was that the employee should have an opportunity to explain their case before dismissal.

In Charalambous, she did have this opportunity, although the EAT agreed the process was “less than ideal”. Also, because the appeal involved a meeting, this would have cured any defects in the earlier process.