This case involved a claim that the respondent employer failed to afford the complainant due process and fair procedures. An investigation into the complainant had been initiated following a complaint against him by a colleague who had alleged the complainant had threatened them. Following an investigation by the employer it was decided that the complaint was well founded and a severe sanction was imposed on the complainant. This finding and the subsequent sanction were upheld following an internal appeal process. The complainant appealed the procedures and sanction imposed to the Court, which heard evidence that the employer’s decision maker had taken material into consideration which was not put into evidence by either party. The claimant had also not been given an opportunity to make submissions. The Court heard that the ‘decision maker’ had not been entitled to make the decision it had made and their letter was a mere recommendation. The employer admitted to treating the claimant differently because of the claimant's history of bringing grievances to the Labour Court.

The Court found that the standards of procedure applied fell short of those required in circumstances where grave allegations of threats against a colleague were made and that the rules of natural justice were not complied with. Accordingly, the employer's decision was set aside. However, the court found that the complaint of threatening behaviour should be heard de novo by an independent person and if necessary the matter can be dealt with again under proper disciplinary procedures.
 https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/Cases/2017/September/LCR21562.html