Case: Handa v Station Hotel (Newcastle) Ltd [2025] EAT 62
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has provided a thoughtful judgment that reassures external HR professionals that they can complete investigations and disciplinary processes without inheriting liability for dismissal decisions.
What happened?
Mr Handa, formerly a director, blew the whistle on alleged financial irregularities. Shortly after, staff filed grievances alleging he had bullied them. The employer outsourced both the grievance investigation and disciplinary hearing to HR consultants.
- Mr Duncan investigated.
- Ms McDougall led the disciplinary hearing and recommended dismissal.
Station Hotel acted on the recommendation and dismissed Mr Handa. Mr Handa sued both consultants personally, alleging they were employer agents who subjected him to whistleblowing detriment.
What did the court decide?
The EAT held:
- Consultants might technically act as agents while performing employment-related functions.
- However, liability requires a causative act or omission by the agent.
- Since the employer, not the consultants, made the dismissal decision, the consultants were not liable.
Why does it matter?
The decision adds nuance to the legal understanding of ‘agency’ in whistleblowing and discrimination claims. While courts acknowledge a consultant might be an agent, that does not mean liability will follow automatically.
What should you do?
- Document decision-making clearly. Who recommended what? Who decided?
- Retain ultimate authority over outcomes, especially dismissals.
- Clarify contractual terms with consultants, including indemnities.
Source: Full Judgment
