The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has made it clear – being dishonest on a job application can get you fired, and there’s not much a tribunal will do to save you. The recent case of Easton v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Border Force) [2025] EAT 15 is a cautionary tale for anyone thinking about leaving out inconvenient details from their CV.
Facts
Mr Easton applied for a role with the Border Force, an arm of the Home Office. The job application provided a section to describe his job history. Mr Easton duly filled this section out but did not disclose that he had previously been unemployed for 3 months following dismissal from a previous role with the Home Office for gross misconduct.
His omission came to light after he had started work, and led to an internal investigation. Following the report, the employer suspended Mr Easton from work, finding that his failure to disclose the dismissal was dishonest and that this dishonesty fundamentally undermined the trust required for his role. He was dismissed for gross misconduct.
Mr Easton brought a claim for unfair dismissal, stating that the dismissal was unreasonable and disproportionate. He argued that the reasons for his dismissal were not relevant to his new employment and he had not intentionally misled his employer. He contended that the job history form was ambiguous and gave no instructions to applicants, that he assumed the Home Office would have records of his previous employment, and that his omission was an oversight rather than an attempt to deceive.
What did the tribunal say?
Both the Employment Tribunal and the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that the Border Force had acted reasonably and was entitled to dismiss Mr Easton. They found that even if Mr Easton hadn’t intended to mislead, his failure to disclose the information was still a serious breach of trust. Though he was not specifically asked to include reasons for dismissal, Mr Easton had a duty to fill the form accurately and this extended to including relevant information such as dates and reasons for dismissal. He was not entitled to assume that the employer would have already known or could have found the information elsewhere.
What does this mean for employers?
This case is a reminder that honesty really is the best policy when it comes to job applications. Here are some key takeaways:
i.Importance of clear recruitment processes: Investing time in your recruitment process and forms can ensure you receive all relevant information needed for a smooth recruitment cycle. It’s far better not to risk the wasted time and costs involved in litigating a sloppy recruitment exercise.
See our Recruitment toolkit for guidance and documentation to guide you through your recruitment process.
ii.Lying (or ‘forgetting’) is a serious issue, but you still need to act fairly: While you are entitled to take action against an employee for lying in their application, you should still follow a proper disciplinary process and ensure your decision is fair before making a final decision.
See our guidance on when you can fairly dismiss an employee here, and you can follow our Disciplinary toolkit to ensure a dismissal is conducted fairly.
iii.Some roles require a higher standard of integrity: If you want to fairly dismiss an employee for lying, it must be relevant to their role. However, in jobs where trust is crucial (eg law enforcement or roles with higher managerial responsibility), even minor dishonesty can be a big deal.
See our Q&A here, for guidance on dismissing employees who lied about their qualifications.
Further steps
With the wide-ranging extension of day-one dismissal rights expected to come into force with the Employment Rights Bill 2025 (still progressing through Parliament), it’s more pressing than ever to be properly prepared for recruitment processes and aware of dismissal obligations. See our helpful blog on the Employment Rights Bill for more.
You can use our range of documents, guidance and toolkits on recruitment to ensure you are properly prepared. Our guidance on hiring and dismissing staff here and here will help to bring you up-to-date with your responsibilities during the hiring – and firing – processes.
The content in this article is up to date at the date of publishing. The information provided is intended only for information purposes, and is not for the purpose of providing legal advice. Sparqa Legal’s Terms of Use apply.
Rahul joined Sparqa in 2025 from the Commercial Court, where he served as a Judicial Assistant. He has active interests in commercial, corporate and employment developments which he pursues alongside teaching undergraduate law.