Navigating Fair Dismissal: Lessons from Lamb v Teva UK for Employers and the Importance of Compliance
- Kate Amey
- Jan 28
- 3 min read
Workplace safety and fair disciplinary procedures are critical for any employer. The case of Lamb v Teva UK highlights how important it is to balance these two priorities carefully. When Mr Lamb, an engineering supervisor, failed to follow safety procedures, it led to serious consequences. His dismissal raised questions about what makes a dismissal fair, especially when procedural issues arise. This blog explores the key lessons from this case and offers practical advice for employers to ensure compliance and protect their businesses.
What Happened in Lamb v Teva UK
Mr Lamb was responsible for supervising equipment that used an electrical charger. When he noticed a fault with the charger, company health and safety rules required him to lock it off and remove it from use until repaired. Instead, he failed to do so and later confirmed the area was safe. Unfortunately, a contractor suffered an electric shock as a result.
Following this incident, Mr Lamb was dismissed for gross misconduct. He challenged the dismissal as unfair, leading to a tribunal and later an appeal. The case focused on whether the employer’s disciplinary process was fair despite some procedural flaws.
Key Issues in the Disciplinary Process
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) reviewed several procedural concerns:
The investigating officer also gave a witness statement.
The note taker during the investigation was also a witness.
Some key evidence was shared less than 24 hours before the disciplinary hearing.
Comments were made suggesting Mr Lamb would not return to the company.
Despite these issues, the EAT upheld the dismissal as fair. It ruled that:
Investigators can also be witnesses without automatically making the process unfair, especially if they are not the decision-makers.
Late evidence disclosure is not unfair if it does not change the allegations and the employee does not object.
Comments about the likely outcome, while unhelpful, do not invalidate the decision if they are not made by the decision-maker.
What Employers Can Learn from This Case
This case offers several practical lessons for employers managing disciplinary procedures:
Follow Clear Health and Safety Procedures
Ensure all employees understand and follow safety rules.
Provide regular training on equipment use and fault reporting.
Act quickly to remove faulty equipment from use to prevent accidents.
Maintain Fair and Transparent Disciplinary Processes
Separate roles where possible: investigators should not be decision-makers.
Share evidence with employees in a timely manner to allow proper preparation.
Avoid making comments that suggest a predetermined outcome.
Document all steps carefully to show fairness and consistency.
Understand What Makes a Dismissal Fair
Fair dismissal depends on both the reason and the process.
Even if minor procedural errors occur, the overall fairness of the process matters most.
Employees’ responses to procedural issues can affect outcomes.
Why Compliance Matters Beyond Legal Requirements
Beyond avoiding legal challenges, compliance with health and safety and fair dismissal procedures protects your business reputation and employee morale. Unsafe workplaces and unfair treatment can lead to:
Increased accidents and injuries
Higher staff turnover and lower productivity
Costly legal disputes and compensation claims
Employers who invest in clear policies and training create safer, more engaged workplaces.
How Lime Business Services Can Help Employers
Navigating employment law can be complex. Lime Business Services offers expert guidance to help you:
Manage disciplinary processes fairly and legally
Prepare for and respond to employment disputes
Don’t wait for a costly incident or legal claim to take action. Reach out to Lime Business Services today to protect your business and your people.
Comments