Lessons for HR: The importance of record-keeping

Our team of employment law experts look into a case that provides a lesson for HR departments on the importance of record-keeping.

In Mayanja v City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) set aside the Employment Tribunal’s (ET) decision to dismiss the claimant’s case after new evidence emerged that undermined the ET’s credibility findings, and highlighted weaknesses in the respondent’s record-keeping.

The claimant applied for a position with the respondent and, following the interview process, asserted that he had been offered and had accepted an unconditional job offer. The respondent disputed this, stating he was only told he was the preferred candidate, subject to satisfactory references. During reference checks, the respondent alleged they discovered that the claimant’s job application provided misleading information, leading to his application not being progressed.

The claimant brought claims for breach of contract, race discrimination, and victimisation arising from the decision not to progress his job application. He has also pursued a claim of race-related harassment in relation to a comment allegedly made by a manager during the selection process.

At the ET stage, he gave evidence that he received a job offer on 18 October 2021 and accepted it by email the next day. The respondent’s manager disputed this, saying no offer was made and that doing so would breach respondent’s policy.

The ET dismissed all claims, finding the claimant not credible and accepting the manager’s evidence in all respects. It also awarded costs against the claimant, concluding that he fabricated the harassment claim and pursued a contract claim he knew to be untrue.

Later, the claimant discovered an email from the respondent’s manager offering him the job and asking for confirmation. He applied for reconsideration based on this new evidence. The ET admitted the email but treated the application as limited to costs. The respondent’s manager accepted that the email was genuine and had been sent by her. The ET acknowledged that its previous finding on the claimant’s truthfulness regarding the contract claim could not stand, but it maintained that the harassment claim was fabricated and reduced the costs award to £200.

The claimant appealed to the EAT against both the liability and costs judgments.

The EAT has set aside an employment tribunal’s decision to dismiss a job applicant’s claims, in light of email evidence he had subsequently discovered on his computer. The tribunal had found that the claimant was not a credible witness, particularly with regard to his assertion that he had been offered a job, which the respondent vehemently denied. However, the new evidence suggested that a job offer had indeed been made. Since the tribunal’s negative assessment of the claimant’s credibility was fundamental to its rejection of all his complaints, the decision could not stand.

What should employers do?

This decision serves as a timely reminder for HR professionals and businesses that effective record-keeping is essential in managing employment relationships. Many organisations have faced prolonged and costly tribunal proceedings, not because appropriate action wasn’t taken, but because poor documentation made it difficult to prove. Beyond the financial and operational impact, such oversights can also lead to damaging press coverage and reputational harm.

Our team of employment professionals can help with any aspects of record-keeping, so please do get in touch.

Our Legal 500-rated employment law & business immigration team are experts in guiding businesses of all sizes and backgrounds through a range of issues that may arise.