Most dismissal claims are lost in the process, not the decision.

Conduct and capability are fair reasons for dismissal. What tribunals examine is whether the employer investigated properly, put the case to the employee, held a hearing they could meaningfully answer, took a decision within the band of reasonable responses, and offered an appeal. Almost all employer-side losses in this area are procedural, and almost all of them were avoidable at the time for a fraction of the eventual cost.

Grievances sit on the same fault line. A grievance handled seriously, in writing, with an outcome and a right of appeal, tends to close the issue down. A grievance ignored, or investigated by the person it concerns, is the raw material of a constructive dismissal or discrimination claim later.

What a specialist checks while the process is live

The questions a tribunal will ask are the questions to ask now:

• Is the allegation defined clearly enough for the employee to answer it, and has the evidence been put to them?
• Is the investigator separate from the decision-maker, and the decision-maker separate from the appeal?
• Was the right to be accompanied offered in writing for any hearing that could lead to a sanction?
• Is any suspension justified, time-limited and on full pay, rather than a default first step?
• Is the sanction consistent with how comparable cases in the business were treated?
• Does anything in the background suggest disability, whistleblowing or a protected characteristic in play?
• Is your own policy being followed, since departing from it is itself evidence of unfairness?

Where these processes go wrong

The first failure is a predetermined outcome. Where the dismissal letter predates the hearing, or the decision-maker also ran the investigation and gave evidence about it, the process reads as confirmation rather than adjudication. Tribunals are alert to it and it is difficult to repair on appeal.

The second is inconsistency. Two employees, comparable conduct, different sanctions, and no documented reason for the difference: that is both an unfair dismissal argument and, if the pair differ by age, race, sex or disability, a discrimination one with no cap on the award.

The third is capability handled as conduct. Where performance is the real issue, the process needs objectives, support, a reasonable period to improve and, where disability is in the picture, consideration of adjustments. Running it as misconduct because it is quicker is the fastest route to a losing case.

How MatchMySolicitor helps

We are a referral service, not a law firm. You tell us about the claim once, and we match it to a firm whose practice is genuinely respondent-side employment work rather than general litigation with an employment sideline.

Every firm on the panel is regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Your details go to one matched firm, never several, and the first conversation is free with no obligation to instruct. Many panel firms offer fixed-fee packages for the response and early stages, and if you hold legal expenses insurance we can match you with firms that work with your policy.

Tell us about the situation in a two-minute form. No documents needed yet.

We match you with a respondent-side specialist, same day where a deadline is urgent.

The solicitor contacts you within 24 hours for a free initial assessment and your options.

1.Tell us about the situation in a two-minute form. No documents needed yet.

2.We match you with a respondent-side specialist, same day where a deadline is urgent.

3.The solicitor contacts you within 24 hours for a free initial assessment and your options.