U for Undue Influence in the Disciplinary Process

Louise Harrison writes:

Summary

A recent Employment Appeals Tribunal (“EAT”) determination demonstrates yet again the EAT’s focus on the integrity of procedures followed in the disciplinary process. In Karen Egan v Ulster Bank Group (Ireland) (UD1772/2010), the EAT accepted that the Claimant’s conduct, for which she had been dismissed, amounted to gross misconduct as defined in her employer’s disciplinary policy. However, the EAT considered that one of the individuals appointed to hear the Claimant’s appeal of the dismissal sanction may have been subjected to ‘undue influence’ by the employer during the process. The EAT determined that the Claimant had been unfairly dismissed and ordered