Employment Appeal Tribunal Sets Aside Unfair Dismissal Ruling in Fieldfisher Case
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has set aside an unfair dismissal ruling, finding the original tribunal incorrectly substituted its own view for the employer's judgment.
• public
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has overturned a decision against Fieldfisher LLP, ruling that the initial Employment Tribunal committed a significant error of law by substituting its own view for that of the employer. The case centred on the dismissal of a Senior Associate, Mr Rustambekov, following allegations of misconduct.
Background to the Dispute
The law firm dismissed Mr Rustambekov in November 2023 based on two primary allegations: sexually harassing a colleague in January 2023, and inappropriate behaviour towards a second colleague at a work event in July 2023. While the firm investigated a separate allegation of sexual assault, this did not form part of the final reason for dismissal.
The original Employment Tribunal concluded the dismissal was unfair. It relied heavily on its own evaluation of evidence, specifically regarding a perceived "negative pull" of lies told by a witness during the investigation. The Tribunal suggested that because the witness had been untruthful about one incident, her entire account was undermined.
The EAT's Findings
In the appeal judgment, the President of the EAT, The Hon. Lord Fairley, ruled that the lower tribunal had exceeded its role. The EAT highlighted that a tribunal's task in misconduct cases is not to re-take the disciplinary decision based on its own assessment of the evidence. Instead, it must determine whether the employer's belief was based on reasonable grounds following a fair investigation.
The EAT found that the original tribunal incorrectly applied legal principles from an immigration case, MA (Somalia), to an employment setting. By doing so, the tribunal improperly substituted its own evaluation of witness credibility for that of the decision-maker at Fieldfisher LLP. The EAT noted that the employer had properly considered various sources of evidence, including contemporaneous WhatsApp messages and witness accounts, in reaching its conclusion.
Outcome
The EAT concluded that the tribunal's erroneous reliance on its own view of the evidence meant the finding of unfair dismissal could not stand. Consequently, the judgment was set aside, and the case has been remitted to a differently constituted tribunal for a fresh determination.
Read the entire judgment here: Fieldfisher LLP v Rustambekov [2026] EAT 99
