Employment · Employment fee-earner, HR director, supervising partner
Check a misconduct dismissal before the decision letter goes
A warehouse supervisor at Corvus Logistics faces dismissal for gross misconduct and the decision letter is drafted. The review reads the investigation file, the invitation letters and the hearing notes together to see whether the process would survive a tribunal.
- Agents
- Research, Employment
- First draft
- A procedural gap list comes back within one run, in time to fix the process before the letter is issued.
The problem
Step 01 of 05
Put the whole file on the matter
The investigation report, both invitation letters, the hearing notes, the witness statements and the draft decision letter are uploaded, with the appeal deadline recorded as a key date.
Project Halcyon: SPA warranties and disclosure
Buy-side warranty review, disclosure analysis and cited due-diligence grid.
- Client
- Halcyon Bidco Ltd
- Reference
- WC-2026-0412
- Practice area
- Corporate / M&A
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Responsible partner
- E. Vance
No conflict check on file.Chat, on this matter
Compare warranties with the disclosure letter.
Three high-priority exceptions require action: the unregistered charge, the change-of-control right and the tribunal claim.
Send a message… (@ to mention tools)BalancedPrepare for- 25 Aug
Disclosure exceptions matrix
Chat
- 21 Aug
Disclosure exceptions matrix
Run · completed · 560 credits
- 18 Aug
Project Halcyon: Disclosure Letter
Document · indexed
- 16 Aug
Project Halcyon: Share Purchase Agreement
Document · indexed
- 4 Aug
Matter opened
Opened
Step 02 of 05
Run the procedural check
Prepare for: Work-Stream Memo, Deliver as: Word. The instruction asks for every step where the process departs from a reasonable investigation and from the statutory code, tied to the document that shows it.
Agent
Jurisdiction
Prepare for
Deliver as
Instruction
What should the agent look for?Documents
Drop a contract, or pick one from the matter
Also on the matter
- Offer_letter_v3.pdf2 pages
- Staff_handbook_2025.docx61 pages
- Board_minute_14_Aug.pdf3 pages
Platform model · zero data retention · audit register onStep 03 of 05
Read the gaps
Four departures come back, the largest being that the decision-maker chaired the investigation meetings, and the CCTV stills were never shown to the employee before the hearing.
6 items need your confirmation14 authorities · Where we lookedSenior Associate Employment Contract: English Law Review
Summary
- 1.
Clause 9(c), non-competeHigh
The 12-month prohibition on working for any law firm anywhere in the UK, Ireland or EU, in any capacity, is almost certainly wider than reasonably necessary and therefore unlikely to be enforceable.
Tillman v Egon Zehnder Ltd [2019] UKSC 32 - 2.
Clause 11, data and monitoringHigh
Blanket contractual consent is not an adequate basis for general employment processing, special-category data or unrestricted monitoring.
UK GDPR, Arts 6 and 9 - 3.
Clause 4, holiday carry-overHigh
The unconditional five-day cap conflicts with mandatory carry-over rights where sickness, statutory leave or employer failure prevents leave being taken.
Working Time Regulations 1998, regs 13 to 13A
- 1.
Step 04 of 05
Fix the letter
The draft decision letter is rewritten so the reason and the reasoning are stated separately, with the appeal route and its deadline set out in plain terms.
6 items need your confirmation14 authorities · Where we lookedSenior Associate Employment Contract: English Law Review
Summary
- 1.
Clause 9(c), non-competeHigh
The 12-month prohibition on working for any law firm anywhere in the UK, Ireland or EU, in any capacity, is almost certainly wider than reasonably necessary and therefore unlikely to be enforceable.
Tillman v Egon Zehnder Ltd [2019] UKSC 32 - 2.
Clause 11, data and monitoringHigh
Blanket contractual consent is not an adequate basis for general employment processing, special-category data or unrestricted monitoring.
UK GDPR, Arts 6 and 9 - 3.
Clause 4, holiday carry-overHigh
The unconditional five-day cap conflicts with mandatory carry-over rights where sickness, statutory leave or employer failure prevents leave being taken.
Working Time Regulations 1998, regs 13 to 13A
- 1.
Step 05 of 05
Confirm before issue
The partner ticks the items, clicks Verify all on the authorities and confirms the two steps that have to happen before the letter is sent.
Replace the UK/Ireland/EU non-compete with a 3 to 6 month restriction tied to competing corporate-law work.
Replace blanket data consent with a lawful-basis clause and a separate monitoring notice.
Remove the five-day carry-over cap and reference the statutory carry-over rules.
Narrow the client non-solicit to clients dealt with in the final 12 months.
Add an explicit working-time opt-out withdrawal mechanism.
Confirm the bonus clause states the discretion is exercised in good faith.
What comes back
A document, not a transcript.
- A list of procedural departures, each tied to the page in the file that evidences it.
- A rewritten decision letter that separates the finding from the reasoning and states the appeal route.
- A view on whether the conduct falls within the band of reasonable responses, written as an assessment rather than a certainty.
- Two steps that must happen before issue, including reconvening to put the CCTV evidence to the employee.
Authorities it checks
- Employment Rights Act 1996, s 98
- ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures
What it does not do
- It does not decide whether to dismiss. That is the employer's decision and the memo says so on its face.
- It reads the documents supplied. An oral warning that never made it into the file cannot be taken into account.
- It does not conduct the reconvened hearing or contact the employee.