Our website is set to allow the use of cookies. For more information and to change settings click here. If you are happy with cookies please click "Continue" or simply continue browsing. Continue.

Employment Law

Legal guidance - compliance - software

06 FEB 2013

Crawford v Suffolk Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust [2012] EWCA Civ 138; [2012] IRLR 402; (2013) EMPLR 003

Disciplinary investigation - suspension

17 February 2012

Court of Appeal

Laws, Elias and Kitchin LJJ

Suspension should not be an automatic reaction to allegations against employees.

Two nurses were suspended after allegations that they assaulted a patient suffering from dementia who had become aggressive.  It was alleged they had tied the patient to a chair with a sheet. The Claimants agreed they had tied the chair to a table but denied tying him to the chair. They gave an explanation of how the sheet had become wrapped around the patient's chest. After a disciplinary investigation, they were dismissed for gross misconduct. An employment tribunal, upheld by the Court of Appeal, concluded that the dismissals were unfair because in concluding that the sheet could not have become wrapped around the patient in the way the Claimants had suggested, they had relied on an experiment conducted by the person conducting the disciplinary hearing. But that experiment was not discussed with the Claimants, who could have demonstrated had they been present how the sheet could have become wrapped around the patient.

The case is interesting because of the Court of Appeal's comments about the use of suspension. Suspending and then forbidding the Claimants from contacting anyone involved should not be a ‘knee-jerk reaction' and any employer who suspends without good reason is likely to breach the obligation of mutual trust and confidence. Suspension is belittling, demoralizing and psychologically damaging; and in this case it was difficult to believe that a reasonable employer could have considered there was any risk of the treatment of which the Claimants had been accused being repeated.

The Court of Appeal was equally scathing about the Trust's decision to notify the police. Although tying a patient to a chair might technically be regarded as an assault, so was physically restraining a patient, something that had been done previously to this patient. Such restraint was obviously justified where the patient, as in this case, was spitting, kicking and punching.

To view the case transcript, you must subscribe to Jordans Employment Law Online (if you already subscribe click here to log in).

To request a free trial click here and select Jordans Employment Law online from the drop down menu

 

 

Social Media in the Workplace

A Handbook

This book is intended as a handbook for advisers to employers, providing an overview of the...

More Info from £65.00
Available in Company Law Online

Law of Termination of Employment, The

Authoritative analysis of the rules governing termination of employment provides coverage of the...

More Info from £110.00
Subscribe to our newsletters