NHS Fife Health Board v Stockman (Unfair Dismissal)

Held : appeal dismissed.� The ET had directed itself correctly in law and was entitled to hold that the Respondent had not carried out a reasonable investigation and had not acted fairly in all of the circumstances.� The opinion evidence of the doctors was admissible.

This is an appeal by NHS Fife Health Board against a decision of the Employment Tribunal (ET) sitting in Edinburgh, in which the decision was sent to parties on 27 June 2013.� The decision of the ET was that the Claimant was unfairly dismissed and a direction was given that a hearing on remedies should be held.� We will refer in these reasons to the parties as the Claimant and the Respondent as they were in the ET.� Mr Truscott QC appeared for the Respondent and Mr Napier QC for the Claimant before us; at the ET Mrs Ewart appeared for the Respondent and Mr Warnock appeared for the Claimant.

Appendix 2 of that policy deals with lapse or loss of registration and states as follows: �

Several staff groups in NHS Fife are required to be registered with Medical or Dental councils�before being able to practice in the NHS� As registration is imperative for certain staff groups it is suggested that all relevant NHS Fife employment contracts contain an express term regarding registration with the relevant body�.

If a member of staff becomes ineligible for registration with the relevant body, then he can no longer be employed in a post requiring registration.� Employers are expected to deal with such a situation, which is not associated with conduct issues, in the same way as any other capability issue.� However it is also recognised that the circumstances leading to the loss of registration may have arisen due to issues of conduct in which case referral to the Management of Employee Conduct Policy would be appropriate