Search

How can we help?

Icon

Can a dismissal be fair without an appeal hearing? 

Employees with two year’s continuous service have the right not to be unfairly  dismissed (and no length of services is required in cases of ‘automatically unfair’ dismissals). But can a dismissal be deemed fair with an appeal hearing?

The law on unfair dismissal 

To avoid a tribunal finding of unfair dismissal the employer must show three things: 

  • A potentially fair reason to dismiss; 
  • That a fair procedure was followed; 
  • That the dismissal was fair in all the circumstances of the case. 

Many employees are now aware of the importance of following this second requirement – the fair procedure – and will offer the employee the right to appeal.  

In the vast majority of cases this will certainly be the right course of action to take. In the case of Moore v Phoenix Product Development Limited the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) ruled that the dismissal was fair without an appeal hearing. However, the EAT decision should not be taken as a green light to dispel with appeal hearings. The facts in Moore will not fit with most dismissals. 

Moore V Phoenix Product Development Ltd 

The claimant was an inventor who stepped down as CEO of the Respondent company. ?He stayed on as director and employee but was unable to accept that he no longer led the Company.  

Working relations broke down irretrievably and he was dismissed under the category of ‘some other substantial reason’. He was not offered a right to appeal his dismissal as the respondent believed the appeal would be futile. Mr Moore lodged an unfair dismissal claim. He lost.    

Both the tribunal and the EAT agreed with the respondents that an appeal would have been futile. The respondent was able to show evidence of the claimant’s foul and abusive emails, his confrontational behaviour and that he was entirely responsible for the breakdown in relationships.   

Employees with two year’s continuous service have the right not to be unfairly  dismissed.

What should employers do now?  

The safest course of action is to continue to offer employees the right of appeal. Appoint someone of appropriate seniority to hear the appeal who has not previously been involved in the disciplinary hearing.  Make sure the appeal chair explains in writing their reasons for dismissing the appeal if that is their decision.  

If you are sure the Claimant’s behaviour falls into the category of Mr Moore’s making an appeal futile, make sure you have documentary evidence of the unreasonable conduct to justify not offering an appeal.  

Also be aware that even if a tribunal finds that the dismissal was substantively fair it may still impose  financial penalties on an employer who fails to follow a fair procedure. This could be awarding the claimant for loss of earnings to cover the time (typically a few weeks) it would have taken to have arranged and heard the appeal. Or impose a percentage uplift (up to 25%) on any loss of earning compensation for failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievances.   

Finally, employers could consider if they should make more use of some substantial other reason (SOSR) as a fair reason for dismissal,  where the circumstances warrant it.  

SOSR is one of the potentially fair reasons for dismissal which is often underused by employers because they are less familiar with it than conduct and capability dismissals. SOSR can be used as a stand-alone reason or as  alternative to use in conjunction with conduct and capability dismissals.  

For legal advice on dismissal and redundancies contact our unfair dismissal lawyers.  

About this article

Disclaimer
This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

art
  • 29 July 2025
  • Commercial Real Estate

Right to Renew: The Law Commission’s Statement

Many commercial tenants occupy their premises under tenancies. Part 2 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (the “Act”) gives these business tenants the right to remain in their premises when their tenancies would have otherwise come to an end, this is known as a “right to renew” or “security of tenure”.

art
  • 29 July 2025
  • Corporate and M&A

Articles of Association v. Shareholders Agreement in England and Wales: Which one works best for you and your company?

The decision of whether to solely rely on a company’s Articles of Association or implement a bespoke Shareholders’ Agreement depends on the specific needs and priorities of the individual shareholders and the company alike.

Pub
  • 28 July 2025
  • Employment

Talking Employment Law: The Employment Rights Bill – Part 3

In part three of the Employment Rights Bill podcast series, Louise Keenan and Lucy White, members of the employment team, will discuss changes to fire and re-hire practices, harassment, zero-hour contracts and tribunal limitation periods.

art
  • 24 July 2025
  • Corporate and M&A

Deal Announcement: Clarkslegal’s corporate lawyers advise on the sale of Just Construction Recruitment Ltd to ASAP TT SAS

Clarkslegal’s corporate team is pleased to have advised the shareholders of Just Construction Recruitment Ltd on the sale of the company to French based, ASAP TT SAS.

art
  • 23 July 2025
  • Immigration

Home Office Announces Major Changes to Skilled Worker Route

On 1 July 2025, the Home Office released a new Statement of Changes (HC 997), delivering on the first phase of what the government calls a “sweeping reform” to the immigration system, as set out in the May 2025 Immigration White Paper. The changes to the Immigration Rules were enforced on 22 July 2025.

art
  • 21 July 2025
  • Employment

When the ‘Kiss Cam’ Captures More Than Just a Moment: Romantic Relationships in the Workplace and the Legal Risks

Imagine this: A packed Coldplay concert. Tens of thousands of fans. Suddenly, the “kiss cam” camera pans to the crowd and lands on a man and woman sharing an affectionate embrace.