In the context of dismissal from employment, observing due process is a cornerstone of ensuring that this is conducted fairly and lawfully. The Industrial Tribunal decision in Dennis Voortman v. VistaJet Limited (Case No. 4231/JD) decided on 9th October 2025, underscores that even in cases of clear misconduct, employers cannot bypass procedural safeguards without risking a finding of unfair dismissal.
Mr. Voortman, employed as a First Officer by VistaJet Ltd, was dismissed following repeated violations of the Company’s safety protocols, culminating into serious breaches of safety rules with potentially grave consequences, to which he himself admitted upon being confronted by the Company.
While recognising that the plaintiff’s conduct was tantamount to gross misconduct and posed significant safety risks, the Tribunal still determined that dismissal was unfair, and this on account of procedural deficiencies concerning the manner in which it was affected. Its conclusion was based on the fact that Mr. Voortman was not given sufficient notice of the disciplinary hearing, was deprived of the opportunity to present a defence or seek assistance, and was not informed of, nor granted, the right of appeal, as required under the Company’s own disciplinary procedures.
Consequently, the Tribunal ordered VistaJet to pay Mr. Voortman €18,750, representing five months of his gross salary, along with costs incurred during the proceedings. The key consideration of the award was not the misconduct itself not constituting just and sufficient cause for summary dismissal but rather the Company’s failure to follow its own procedures and ensure that Mr. Voortman had a fair opportunity to respond to the charges brought against him.
The key take away from this decision is that substantive misconduct does not excuse procedural lapses. Employers must ensure that disciplinary measures are conducted in accordance with internal policies and the principles of procedural fairness, irrespective of the severity of the misconduct. Procedural safeguards exist to protect employees from arbitrary or unfair treatment and to uphold fairness, even in cases of serious wrongdoing.
Employers must therefore balance the need to address serious misconduct with the obligation to conduct fair and transparent procedure, as procedural shortcuts, no matter how justified by the circumstances, can nonetheless expose an employer to liability.
By: Julia Darmanin
