← Back to case studies
Case law
Chairman and Governors of Amwell View School v Dogherty

Recording your hearing can help you, but recording the panel afterwards usually cannot

The ruling

EAT allowed the open hearing recording but excluded the panel's private deliberations”

A recording of your own disciplinary or appeal hearing can be used as evidence in an unfair dismissal claim. A recording of the panel's private deliberations after you leave the room usually cannot, because the law protects that discussion on public policy grounds.

  • If you plan to record a hearing, focus on the part where you are present and being addressed. That is the part most likely to help you if there is a dispute about how you were treated.
  • Do not rely on capturing what the panel says once you have left the room. Even if you manage it, that recording is unlikely to be usable as evidence.
  • Get advice before your hearing if your case turns on what is or is not admissible evidence. The rules can be technical, and getting them wrong can weaken your position.
Read the full case

The situation

A teaching assistant at a special school faced disciplinary proceedings over allegations that she had used unreasonable force towards a child and used inappropriate language to, or about, other children. The school held three hearings in private, two disciplinary and one an appeal. At each one, once she and other participants had left the room, the panel deliberated privately before announcing its decision. Without telling anyone, she secretly recorded both the open parts of the hearings and the panel's private deliberations afterwards. She was found guilty of gross misconduct and dismissed. Her internal appeal failed too.

What the tribunal found

When she brought an unfair dismissal claim, she wanted to use both recordings as evidence. The employment tribunal allowed this, provided the hearing was postponed so the school could listen to the tapes first, with her paying the postponement costs. The school appealed.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal agreed that no crime had been committed by making the recordings. It also rejected the school's human rights arguments and found that postponing the hearing was the right way to deal with the late disclosure. But it drew a sharp line between the two recordings.

The recording of the open hearing, where she was present and being addressed, was rightly admitted: it went directly to how she had been treated. The panel's private deliberations were different. The EAT ruled that recording out as evidence, on public policy grounds. A disciplinary panel needs to be able to speak frankly about the evidence, trusting that the discussion stays private.

Full citation

Chairman and Governors of Amwell View School v Dogherty. Case UKEAT/0243/06. Employment Appeal Tribunal. 15 September 2006.

Last reviewed 8 July 2026