In a message dated 05/02/2001 14:31:00 GMT Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

<< EG, there are stock shortages; the employer suspects A, B or C,
 but wishes to gather evidence to point conclusively at one before launching
 formal proceedings. the invetigation may well include taking statements from
 others.  If the suspect becomes aware of the investigation, or suspects,
 does he have the right to demand disclosure of all the evidence that is
 being accumulated?  is this not equivalent to the Police telling a suspect
 he is under suspicion, and allowing him to destroy the evidence or cover his
 tracks?!

 I agree that it would be very unusual for the suspect not to have the right
 of access to all the evidence being used in a disciplinary hearing, but
 logic suggests a different situation ought to prevail during the
 investigation.  Or is the solution to hold the information at that
 investigatory stage in a manual file that is not structured in such a way as
 to fall within the act? >>

------------
I believe in this instance (totally different from the example that started
this thread) the crime detection/prevention exemption would apply.  But
internal discipline is not crime.  If giving the information to the
individual would stop the action, is that not what you intend in the first
place?  If giving the detail would allow them time before the hearing to
prepare a defence, is that not just being fair and remembering the person has
human rights?

Ian B
Keep IT Legal Ltd

Please Note: The information contained in this document does not replace or
negate the need for proper legal advice and/or representation. It is
essential that you do not rely upon any advice given without contacting your
solicitor.  If you need further explanation of any points raised please
contact Keep I.T. Legal Ltd at the address below:

55 Curbar Curve
Inkersall, Chesterfield
Derbyshire  S43 3HP
(Reg 3822335)
Tel: 01246 473999
Fax: 01246 470742
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Website: www.keepitlegal.co.uk