Department for Work and Pensions v Kiani
The EAT allowed the DWP’s appeals concerning unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal and contribution after an employee accessed her son’s Universal Credit account. Further submissions on disposal were ordered, so the judgment did not itself prescribe a final remittal outcome.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal allowed the Department for Work and Pensions’ appeals in Department for Work and Pensions v Kiani, in a judgment dated 6 November 2026. The appeal hearing took place on 2 July 2026. The case concerns the different questions raised by unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal and contributory conduct after an employee accessed a family member’s benefit account without a legitimate business reason. It also illustrates the danger of allowing a tribunal’s preferred disciplinary outcome to replace the statutory assessment of an employer’s decision.
Tasneem Kiani began working for the department in 1997 and was an Executive Officer working as a Work Coach at Redbridge Jobcentre Plus by 2019. Her adult son applied for Universal Credit on 2 December 2019. She was not his adviser. Nevertheless, she accessed his account on 3, 4, 10, 12 and 17 December 2019. She accepted that she had neither a legitimate business reason nor appropriate authorisation. The fact of the accesses was therefore not a contested allegation requiring the employer to choose between conflicting witness accounts.