The Claimant was a teacher. In 2016 it was reported by a pupil that the Claimant had grabbed him, shoved him against the wall and then pushed two forefingers against his throat. It was concluded, on the balance of probabilities, that the allegations against the Claimant were proven and that he should be summarily dismissed. His claim of unfair dismissal was dismissed by the ET. The ET rejected the suggestion that the investigation had been biased against the Claimant. It concluded that the decisions made – specifically, as to who to interview and who not to interview - had fallen within the band of reasonable responses. It also found that it was within the reasonable range to decide not to inform the Claimant and the disciplinary panel about interviews with those who had seen nothing; it did not follow that, because those individuals had seen nothing, nothing had happened. The Claimant appealed, arguing that given the career-changing impact of the allegation the Respondent's investigation was inadequate.

The EAT dismissed the appeal. The ET had correctly directed itself as to the higher standard of investigation and process that might be expected given the potentially career-changing nature of the allegation against the Claimant.