ISSUE SPOTLIGHT: LEGAL SERVICES ISSUESPOTLIGHT
Northamptonshire Chamber members can offer expert advice when it comes to LEGAL SERVICES
& HOLMES TEAM The Dispute Resolution and Civil Litigation department at Lamb & Holmes Solicitors has seen significant change over the past year with the introduction of two key members of staff. Kay Hewitt is head of the
DUO JOIN LAMB DEALING WITH MISCONDUCT
The Wilson Browne Solicitors’ team of experienced employment solicitors specialise in guiding employers through the ever changing world of employment law. Head of team Jennie Jahina (pictured)
shares her knowledge on how to deal with misconduct by employees. She said: “The Employment Appeals
Dispute Resolution and Civil Litigation Department. Kay brings a wealth of experience and is quick to understand her clients’ needs. Suzanne Bingham qualified and
joined the firm last year. Her key strengths are in debt recovery, landlord and tenant issues, and contractual disputes. Other team members include
Charlotte Davison, legal executive in training, and Ashleigh Towerton, assistant to Kay.
Tribunal (EAT) recently determined the case of Quintiles Commercial UK Ltd v Barongo. “The Quintiles’ appeal was against
an employment tribunal’s finding that a dismissal without prior warning for ‘serious’ misconduct was unfair. The employee Mr Barongo was dismissed for acts initially deemed to amount to “gross misconduct” but which, following an internal appeal, were re-labelled as amounting to “serious misconduct”. Despite the re-labelling, the dismissal decision was upheld.
“Mr Barongo acknowledged the misconduct. He had
put forward mitigation for his actions and, crucially, had no live disciplinary warnings when he was dismissed. “On appeal, the EAT found the absence of warnings in instances of serious misconduct did not automatically render a dismissal unfair. “Instead, the question is – does the dismissal fall within the band of reasonable responses? While the question of warnings is a key consideration when deciding this, it is not conclusive. This decision may appear to exonerate the need for warnings. However employers should be aware that, generally speaking, it is likely the absence of warnings in a disciplinary process will render a
dismissal unfair, save in cases of gross misconduct or exceptional circumstance cases involving serious misconduct. For this reason employers are advised to obtain legal advice before considering dismissals.”
30 inbusiness AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2018
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44
