In a recent decision, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) clarified the role of externally appointed HR consultants in employment-related procedures. The tribunal initially decided that it was not arguable that two HR consultants, one appointed to investigate grievances and the other to conduct a disciplinary hearing, were acting as the employer’s agents during these functions.
The EAT decided that individuals retained to carry out employment-related procedures, such as grievance or disciplinary investigations, could indeed be regarded as the employer’s agents while performing these duties. The fact that these consultants were external appointees and conducted their duties independently, including writing reports, did not preclude them from being considered the employer’s agents in relation to their conduct during their assignments.
However, the EAT found no arguable basis for concluding that the HR consultants were co-liable for the dismissal decision as the employer’s agents. The employer’s reliance on the investigation processes carried out by the HR consultants to support its case for fair dismissal does not impose liability on the consultants for the dismissal decision. Similarly, the fact that the consultants’ activities and reports were essential links in the chain of causation leading to the dismissal decision does not provide grounds for imposing liability on them based on agency.
Handa v Station Hotel (Newcastle) Ltd and others [2025] EAT 62 (2 May 2025)
