Claimant:
P Easton

Respondent:
Secretary of State for the Home Department (Border Force)

Claimant did not disclose his previous dismissal for gross misconduct in application.  This was found to be grounds for dismissal by reason of misconduct.

The claimant was dismissed from the Home Office for gross misconduct in 2016.  This led to Tribunal claims which were settled.  The agreement did not require the reason for dismissal to be altered.  The claimant took up another job with the Department for Work and Pensions and then applied for a role with the Border Force.  The claimant emailed the respondent during that process to ask if he would be precluded from applying considering his dismissal in 2016.  He received no reply. He asked the same by telephone and he was told that it was not an automatic bar to being re-employed.

The claimant applied as an internal candidate for an external role.  In the application form, under ‘Employment History', the claimant merely stated the years he had been working which demonstrated no gap between his employment with the Home Office and the Department for Work and Pensions.   He made no reference to the fact that he was dismissed. The claimant suggested he raised it at interview but this was not upheld, with no written evidence of it or any evidence from those on the interview panel.  The claimant was offered the role and he completed the security vetting form in which he used months rather than years for previous employment which did show a gap but the form is never seen by the vacancy holder.

The claimant took up the role in January 2020 and in May 2020 a disciplinary investigation took place relating to the fact that the claimant had been previously dismissed for gross misconduct and that he had made false declarations on his application form.  This led to a decision to dismiss which the claimant appealed.  Following the appeal being rejected he instigated Tribunal claims.

The Tribunal, at first instance, was satisfied by the process that was undertaken in relation to the investigation.   The claimant raised issues about the fact that the investigator was asking information about the incident leading to dismissal in 2016.  The Tribunal had no issue with that and found it was reasonable in the circumstances.  The Tribunal found that the respondent had satisfied the burden to show that the ground of dismissal was misconduct.   This misconduct took place in 2019 through the application process when he failed to disclose relevant and material information.  As a result, the claim was dismissed.

The claimant appealed to the EAT, where it was held that the Tribunal was entitled to find that the respondent believed that the claimant’s conduct was gross misconduct. It was the claimant’s decision to present his employment history which obscured the fact and nature of his previous dismissal and that was dishonest.

The importance of honesty within an application process and ensuring that all relevant material is disclosed is highlighted here. The application process and how it is conducted by employers is a mechanism to ensure that there is rigour in choosing the right applicant both in terms of success in the role but also the wider ambit of employment including interacting with colleagues and others.   Therefore, it is based upon this trust and honesty within the process that the decision is made.  Where relevant material has been omitted, as is here, then the Tribunal is demonstrating that it can amount to misconduct and that a dismissal will be allowed.

You can read the full decision here:
https://www.gov.uk/employment-appeal-tribunal-decisions/mr-p-easton-v-secretary-of-state-for-the-home-department-border-force-2025-eat-15