Workplace Investigations.

Interviews are central to most investigations, and conducting them fairly is essential to a sound process. Good practice includes: preparing for each interview, with the relevant questions and documents to hand; explaining to the interviewee the purpose of the interview, the process, and the importance of confidentiality; asking open, non-leading questions and letting the interviewee give their account, then probing for detail; treating all interviewees fairly and without prejudgment, whether they are the person complained about, a complainant, or a witness; keeping accurate notes of each interview, and asking the interviewee to confirm or sign them as a fair record; and allowing the person under investigation a fair opportunity to respond to the matters raised against them. Interviewees may be entitled or permitted to be accompanied, depending on the nature of the meeting and the employer's procedures. The investigator should remain neutral, gathering the account rather than challenging or pressuring the interviewee inappropriately. Fairly conducted, well-documented interviews produce reliable evidence and protect the integrity of the investigation. We advise investigators on conducting interviews properly and on recording them appropriately.

Complaints of bullying, harassment, or discrimination require particular care, both because of their sensitivity and because of the legal stakes. These investigations must be handled promptly, impartially, and confidentially, with sensitivity to all those involved — the complainant, the person complained about, and any witnesses — who may find the process distressing. The investigator must be genuinely impartial and alert to the possibility of discrimination. Handling such complaints properly is also a compliance issue: since October 2024, employers have been under a legal duty to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment of their workers, and from October 2026 that duty strengthens to taking all reasonable steps, with employers also becoming liable for harassment of their staff by third parties such as customers and clients. A tribunal can increase compensation in a successful sexual harassment claim by up to 25% where the employer has failed to meet the duty. Investigating complaints thoroughly and fairly — and acting on the findings — is part of meeting these obligations and protecting both staff and the business. We advise employers on handling sensitive complaints and on the steps needed to meet the harassment duty.

Maintaining confidentiality and protecting those involved is essential to a fair and effective investigation. Confidentiality protects the integrity of the investigation — preventing evidence from being contaminated and accounts from being influenced — and protects the interests and reputations of everyone involved, including the person complained about, who is entitled to be treated fairly while the facts are established. Practical measures include: limiting knowledge of the investigation to those who genuinely need to know; reminding those involved of the importance of confidentiality; handling documents and information securely and in compliance with data protection law; and being careful in communications not to prejudge or disclose more than necessary. At the same time, complete secrecy is not always possible or appropriate — the person under investigation must be told the allegations and given a fair opportunity to respond, and some disclosure is inevitable. The investigator should also be alert to the welfare of those involved, who may find the process stressful, and signpost support where appropriate. Balancing confidentiality, fairness, and welfare requires judgment. We advise employers on managing confidentiality and protecting those involved throughout an investigation.

An investigation and a disciplinary process are distinct stages, and keeping them separate is important to fairness. The investigation comes first: its purpose is to establish the facts objectively — to find out what happened, gather the relevant evidence, and determine whether there is a case to answer. The investigator does not decide on any sanction; they establish the facts and, where asked, whether the matter should proceed further. The disciplinary process comes afterwards, if the investigation shows there is a case to answer: it is where the allegations are put to the employee at a hearing, the employee responds, and a decision-maker decides the outcome and any sanction. The separation matters because fairness requires that the person who investigates is, wherever practical, different from the person who decides the outcome — so that the decision-maker comes to the matter with an open mind. Blurring the two stages, or having the same person investigate and decide, undermines the fairness of the process. We help employers structure these stages correctly and keep the investigation and decision-making appropriately separate.

Proper planning and scoping at the outset is what makes an investigation effective and fair. Before starting, the investigator should be clear about: the precise allegations or issues to be investigated — the terms of reference or scope, which should be defined clearly and not allowed to drift; what questions the investigation needs to answer; who needs to be interviewed and what evidence needs to be gathered; and the timescale. A clear scope keeps the investigation focused and proportionate, and ensures all relevant matters are covered while avoiding an open-ended enquiry that strays into unrelated territory. The plan should identify the witnesses and documents relevant to the issues, and the order in which to approach them. Planning should also address practical and fairness matters — such as how confidentiality will be maintained, whether anyone needs to be suspended, and how those involved will be supported. Investigations that are poorly scoped tend to be slow, unfocused, and vulnerable to challenge. Taking time to plan properly at the start pays off in a thorough and defensible investigation. We help employers plan and scope investigations appropriately.

Gathering and handling evidence properly is fundamental to a credible investigation. The investigator should identify and collect all the evidence relevant to the issues — which may include documents, emails, messages, records, CCTV, and other material, as well as witness accounts. Evidence should be gathered objectively, seeking out material that points in all directions rather than only that which supports a particular conclusion. It should be preserved carefully and securely, with a clear record of what has been gathered and from where. The investigator must handle personal and sensitive information in compliance with data protection law, collecting and retaining only what is relevant and necessary, and keeping it secure. Where evidence is provided in confidence, the investigator should consider how to use it fairly, balancing confidentiality against the right of the person under investigation to know and respond to the case against them. The weight and reliability of each piece of evidence should be assessed objectively. Sound evidence-handling underpins a defensible investigation and protects the business if the matter is later challenged. We advise employers on gathering and handling evidence correctly.

Suspension during an investigation is sometimes appropriate but should never be automatic. It may be justified where it is genuinely necessary — for example, to protect others, to preserve evidence or the integrity of the investigation, or where the nature of the allegation makes the employee's continued presence inappropriate. However, suspension is a serious step and should be considered carefully rather than imposed as a knee-jerk reaction. Important principles are: suspension should be a neutral act, not a disciplinary sanction or a presumption of guilt; alternatives to suspension — such as a temporary change of duties or location — should be considered first; any suspension should be for as short a time as possible and kept under review; and the reasons should be explained to the employee and confirmed in writing. Unnecessary or poorly handled suspension can itself damage the relationship of trust and confidence between employer and employee, and in some circumstances can give rise to claims. Because suspension carries legal and practical risks, employers should take advice before suspending, particularly in sensitive cases. We advise employers on whether suspension is justified and how to handle it.

A poorly conducted investigation exposes a business to significant risk, because the investigation is the foundation on which subsequent decisions rest. If the investigation is flawed — inadequate, biased, badly scoped, or poorly documented — any decision based on it is vulnerable. The principal risk arises where a disciplinary sanction or dismissal follows: a dismissal can be found unfair where it was based on an unreasonable or inadequate investigation, because the employer did not establish a genuine belief in misconduct on reasonable grounds. Other risks include: discrimination claims, where a complaint of harassment or discrimination was not properly investigated, which can carry uncapped compensation and engage the duty to prevent sexual harassment; grievance escalation and constructive dismissal claims, where an employee's complaint was not taken seriously; breach of trust and confidence; and reputational damage, both internally and externally. A flawed investigation can turn a manageable issue into a costly claim. Most of these risks are avoidable with a properly planned, impartial, and well-documented investigation. Because the stakes are high, taking advice on serious or sensitive investigations is a sound investment. We help employers conduct investigations that are robust and defensible.

A workplace investigation is a structured process of gathering and assessing the facts about a workplace issue, so that the employer can make an informed and fair decision about what, if anything, to do next. An investigation is needed whenever an employer must establish what has happened before taking action — most commonly in connection with: a disciplinary matter, such as alleged misconduct; a grievance raised by an employee; a complaint of bullying, harassment, or discrimination; concerns about performance or capability; a whistleblowing disclosure; or any other serious workplace concern. The purpose of the investigation is to find out the facts objectively and fairly — not to build a case against anyone, but to establish what actually happened so that any subsequent decision is sound and defensible. A proper investigation is the foundation of a fair process: decisions taken without one, or on the basis of a flawed investigation, are vulnerable to challenge. The scale and formality of the investigation should be proportionate to the seriousness of the matter. We advise employers on when and how to investigate workplace issues effectively.

The investigation report is the key output of the investigation, setting out what was done, what was found, and the basis for the findings. A good investigation report typically includes: the terms of reference or scope of the investigation; the process followed, including who was interviewed and what evidence was considered; a clear and objective summary of the evidence gathered; the investigator's findings of fact, based on the evidence, with reasons; and, where the investigator has been asked to advise on this, a conclusion on whether there is a case to answer that should proceed to a disciplinary or other process. The report should be balanced and objective, distinguishing clearly between evidence, findings of fact, and any recommendations, and it should address the evidence pointing in all directions rather than only that supporting a particular conclusion. It should not usually decide on any sanction — that is for the decision-maker at any subsequent hearing. A clear, well-reasoned, and objective report supports a fair decision and stands up to scrutiny if the matter is challenged. We advise investigators on preparing reports that are thorough, balanced, and defensible.

While many investigations can be handled internally, there are circumstances in which appointing an external investigator is the better course. These include: where the matter is particularly serious, complex, or high-risk, and a robust, expert investigation is essential; where the people involved are senior, making it difficult to find an appropriately independent internal investigator; where there is a real risk that an internal investigation would be seen as biased or lacking independence, which could undermine confidence in the outcome; where the matter is especially sensitive, such as serious harassment or discrimination allegations; where the business lacks the internal resource, skill, or capacity to conduct the investigation properly; or where the credibility of an independent investigation is important to demonstrate the matter has been taken seriously. An external investigator brings independence, specialist skill, and objectivity, and can strengthen the credibility and defensibility of the process. The cost of an external investigator must be weighed against these benefits, but in the right case it is a worthwhile investment that protects the business. We can act as an independent external investigator and advise on when this approach is appropriate.

Choosing the right person to carry out an investigation is an important decision that affects both its quality and its fairness. The investigator should be: impartial and free from any conflict of interest — not someone personally involved in the matter, a witness, or the person who will decide the outcome; sufficiently senior and credible for the matter in hand; and competent to conduct an investigation, with the time and objectivity to do it properly. In many cases an appropriate manager or HR professional within the business can carry out the investigation. However, for more serious, sensitive, or complex matters — or where the people involved are senior, where there is a risk of perceived bias, or where specialist skill is needed — it may be appropriate to appoint an external investigator to ensure independence and expertise. Whoever conducts it, the investigator must approach the matter with an open mind, focused on establishing the facts rather than reaching a predetermined conclusion. We advise employers on selecting an appropriate investigator and can act as an independent external investigator where that is the right approach.