EAT finds dismissal unfair due to defective internal appeal process.

The EAT has held that the Respondent unfairly dismissed the Claimant, given the severity of the defects with the internal appeal process.

The Claimant, a heavy goods vehicle driver, was dismissed by the Respondent for medical incapability after more than two years' absence due to vertigo and vestibular migraines.

Although the initial dismissal process was found to be reasonable, the internal appeal against dismissal was marred by significant procedural failings: the nominated appeal manager declined to hear the appeal, his replacement was unavailable for the rescheduled hearing, and the HR business partner placed the onus on the Claimant to choose the appeal manager and propose dates, without written confirmation.

Ultimately the appeal never took place. The EAT found that the ET erred in law by not properly considering the impact of the defective appeal process. The EAT emphasised that a procedurally defective appeal can render a dismissal unfair, and the more striking the defects, the greater the need for the ET to explain why the dismissal was nonetheless fair. In this case, the appeal process was so flawed that the only proper conclusion was unfair dismissal.

The EAT substituted a finding of unfair dismissal. (Milrine v DHL Services Ltd)