The Home Office

Case Summary

The claimant worked as an immigration enforcement officer at the Home Office from 1991 to February 2022. She was dismissed for having carried out unauthorised searches on the Home Office computer system on relatives of hers, and of relatives and other parties connected to a colleague who had asked her to make some searches.

The claimant's unfair dismissal claim was dismissed, indicating the tribunal found the dismissal to be fair. The claimant was dismissed for carrying out unauthorised searches on the Home Office computer system, which constituted a breach of her duties and misconduct.

• •The claimant was dismissed for having carried out unauthorised searches on the Home Office computer system on relatives of hers, and of relatives and other parties connected to a colleague who had asked her to make some searches

Judgment approved by the Court for handing down Pasha v The Home Office © EAT 2026 Page 1 [2026] EAT 42 Neutral Citation Number: [2026] EAT 42 Case No: EA-2023-001064-JOJ EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL Rolls Building Fetter Lane, London, EC4A 1NL Date: 17 March 2026 Before: HIS HONOUR JUDGE BARKLEM - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between: MS RUKHSANA PASHA Appellant - and – THE HOME OFFICE Respondent - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ms Leslie Millin for the Appellant Mr Tom Kirk (instructed by TLT LLP) for the Respondent Hearing date: 18 December 2025 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT Judgment approved by the Court for handing down Pasha v The Home Office © EAT 2026 Page 2 [2026] EAT 42 SUMMARY Unfair Dismissal The claimant worked as an immigration enforcement officer at the Home Office from 1991 to February 2022. She was dismissed for having carried out unauthorised searches on the Home Office computer system on relatives of hers, and of relatives and other parties connected to a colleague who had asked her to make some searches. There were plainly shortcomings in the investigation process, and the disciplining officer took it upon himself to clarify with the individuals whom the claimant contended had authorised her to make certain of the searches. The claimant and her union representative were told of the results of these prior to the disciplinary hearing. Following the disciplinary hearing the disciplining officer made further ch…