Your managers dismiss an employee after a defective investigation. The employee appeals. A senior leader conducts a thorough review and upholds the decision. Has the appeal repaired the damage?

Not necessarily. That is the practical message from Argence-Lafon v Ark Syndicate Management. The Court of Appeal has confirmed that an internal appeal forms part of the overall assessment of fairness, but it cannot be assumed to cure serious defects in the process that led to dismissal.

What happened?

Mr Argence-Lafon was a senior underwriter. He raised concerns about an insurance claim that he believed was fraudulent. His employer investigated and found no evidence of fraud.

The employer later raised performance concerns and placed him on a formal performance improvement plan. He challenged three of its objectives as unrealistic or unachievable.

Following a grievance and disciplinary process, the employer dismissed him on Monday 9th August 2021. It relied on his failure to engage with the performance process and a breakdown in trust and confidence arising partly from his continuing fraud allegations. His internal appeal failed.

The Employment Tribunal rejected his whistleblowing dismissal claim but found his dismissal unfair.

What did the Court decide?

The Employment Appeal Tribunal overturned the unfair dismissal finding. It considered that the Tribunal had failed to properly address the internal appeal and whether it could have cured the earlier defects.

The Court of Appeal disagreed and restored the Tribunal’s unfair dismissal finding. The Tribunal had considered the appeal and was entitled to find the dismissal unfair when it assessed the process.

Why did it reach that decision?

Two defects mattered.

First, the employer had not reasonably investigated the performance objectives that Mr Argence-Lafon was resisting. A proper investigation would have revealed important context about his previous performance management, the expectations communicated to him and the scale of the new targets. The Tribunal found that a reasonable investigation might have led to a different conclusion.

Second, the employer introduced a breakdown of trust and confidence during the disciplinary hearing without giving him advance notice that this allegation might lead to dismissal. He therefore had no proper opportunity to prepare his response.

The important limit is that the Court did not decide that appeals cannot cure earlier procedural defects. They can. Fairness depends on the process viewed as a whole. Here, however, the appeal did not repair the significant investigative failings underlying the performance aspect of the dismissal.

An appeal is a safeguard, not a procedural reset button.

What should you do?

Get the investigation right first time
Test the evidence behind performance concerns and the reasonableness of objectives before anyone decides to dismiss.
Tell employees the case they must answer
If a new and potentially decisive allegation emerges, give them notice and a genuine opportunity to respond.
Record the reasoning
Decision-makers should be able to show what evidence they considered, what they challenged and why dismissal followed.
Use appeals properly
Give the appeal decision-maker enough independence, authority and information to revisit the substance, not simply endorse what has already happened.
Do not rely on the appeal as insurance
A polished appeal cannot safely compensate for an investigation that never addressed the central issue in the first place.

Source: Argence-Lafon v Ark Syndicate Management Ltd [2026] EWCA Civ 1039 (04 August 2026)