Michelmores Michelmores
Michelmores Michelmores
  • Home
  • Expertise
  • People
  • Insights & Events
  • Careers
  • About
  • ESG
  • Contact
Share
Published February 25th 2025
Home > News & Insights > Article

Easton v Secretary of State (Border Force): officer fairly dismissed for not disclosing previous firing

Young businesswoman looking at view from modern office
Author
Daniel Onafuwa
Daniel Onafuwa

To what extent are employees obliged to disclose their full employment history on an application for employment? That is the question that was addressed in the recent case of Easton v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Border Force). The Claimant applied for a job with the Respondent (the Border Force). The application form included a free-text box for ‘Employment History’, where the Claimant listed only years of employment instead of a breakdown of his full employment history by job role.

This hid a three-month gap that occurred after the Claimant had been dismissed for gross misconduct from another Home Office role. The Claimant didn’t mention the dismissal or the gap in his employment history during interview. However, the Respondent discovered this after the Claimant started work, so launched a disciplinary investigation. The Respondent concluded that the Claimant was dishonest by omitting information and dismissed him for gross misconduct.

The Claimant brought claims before the employment tribunal (‘Tribunal’), which dismissed the Claimant’s claim for unfair dismissal, concluding that the dismissal was fair and was a reasonable response from the Respondent.

The Claimant appealed, arguing that he was being punished for failing to provide information that was not specifically requested within the application form, and the Tribunal did not put sufficient weight to that fact.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (‘EAT’) dismissed the appeal, concluding that the Tribunal was free to conclude on the facts that the Respondent had reasonable grounds to believe the Claimant’s actions were dishonest by obscuring the fact and nature of his previous dismissal.

The EAT held that a reasonable applicant would understand that an ‘Employment History’ section required a full and transparent account, including providing information about any employment gaps.

To discuss any of the issues raised in this article, including concerns regarding applications for employment, please do not hesitate to contact Daniel Onafuwa, James Baker or another member of the Employment Team.

Share
Author
Daniel Onafuwa
Daniel Onafuwa

Contact us

+44 (0) 333 004 3456

enquiries@michelmores.com

Subscribe to updates

  • Quick Links
    • Online Payments
    • People
    • About
    • Careers
    • Staff Login
  • Legal & Regulatory
    • View all policies
    • Privacy Policy
    • Website Terms
    • Cookie Policy
    • Modern Slavery Act

Locations:

  • london
  • cheltenham
  • bristol
  • exeter

© Michelmores LLP is a Limited Liability Partnership, authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA authorisation number 463401) and registered in England and Wales under Partnership No. OC326242.
The registered office is Woodwater House, Pynes Hill, Exeter, EX2 5WR. A list of the members (all of whom are solicitors or barristers) is available for inspection at the registered office and at michelmores.com

  • © 2025 Michelmores LLP. All rights reserved
  • Website maintained by Appeal Digital