Insights overview

Case update | Is an investigation meeting required to ensure that a conduct dismissal is fair?

Where an employer has dismissed an employee for conduct reasons, is a separate investigatory meeting required to make that dismissal fair?

Sunshine Hotel v Goddard

In this case, Mr Goddard was suspected of sleeping whilst on duty as a security guard at the Sunshine Hotel. An ‘investigation’ was carried out which involved watching CCTV from the night in question. Mr Goddard was subsequently invited to a disciplinary hearing at which he was dismissed. Mr Goddard subsequently brought a successful unfair dismissal claim in the Employment Tribunal. His employer appealed on the basis that the Tribunal had incorrectly found that the dismissal was unfair because there was no investigatory hearing prior to the disciplinary proceedings. The EAT highlighted that there is no specific requirement in statute, caselaw or in the Acas Code of Practice to hold an investigatory meeting with the employee in every case. However, the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires an employer to act ‘reasonably’ in all the circumstances and the Acas Code sets out that an employer should ‘carry out necessary investigations…without unreasonable delay to establish the facts of the case’. The EAT therefore dismissed the employer’s appeal, finding that whilst there is no requirement for an investigation meeting, the investigation carried out by Sunshine Hotel had not met the standards required.

Comment: Employers (particularly larger employers with ample resources) should should ensure: (1) that as much investigation into disciplinary matters is carried out as is reasonable in the circumstances (which may well include an investigation meeting with the accused); and (2) that the employee has sufficient information about the allegations against them going into any disciplinary process. Employers should also check any collective agreements, contracts or policies and procedures for a requirement to carry out an investigatory meeting, as failure to comply with internal requirements could lead to a breach of contract claim or at the least strengthen argument for unfair dismissal.