GREECE Law and Practice Contributed by: Semina Zavitsanou, Yannis Ragos, Maria Siraga and Panagiota Kelali, POTAMITISVEKRIS
“beyond reasonable doubt” that no such misconduct has occurred and that all statutory and internal pro - cedural obligations have been duly observed (Article 68 GLC – reversal of burden of proof). 6. Conclusion and Outcome of an HR Internal Investigation 6.1 Deciding to End an HR Internal Investigation Greek law does not prescribe a fixed threshold for ending an investigation. In practice, the person who is conducting the investigation brings it to a close once enough information to make a well-grounded decision has been gathered. The standard is whether further steps would meaningfully change the outcome, taking into account proportionality and fairness. Investiga - tions may also end if allegations are clearly unfounded or if key facts cannot be established despite reason - able efforts. Employers are expected to act promptly, avoiding unnecessary delays that could affect work - place relations or increase legal risks. 6.2 Procedure for Ending an HR Internal Investigation There is no statutory procedure for closing an investi - gation, but employers typically follow internal guide - lines and policies to ensure consistency. Once the investigation is complete, the decision maker or inves - tigator should document the basis for ending the pro - cess and communicate the outcome to the relevant parties. When the investigation is concluded early, for exam - ple, due to insufficient evidence, the communication may be more limited, but it still generally explains that no further action will be taken. Where the investigation has reached a full conclu - sion, employers often outline next steps, including any remedial or disciplinary measures. 6.3 Conclusion There is no legal requirement that conclusions be recorded in a particular format. Nevertheless, most employers prepare an investigation report because it provides clarity, supports consistency and may be
needed if decisions are later challenged. Smaller or less complex investigations may result in a shorter written report, while more serious matters – particu - larly those involving harassment, misconduct or com - pliance issues – usually require a more detailed report. The level of formality depends on the nature of the allegations and the potential consequences for the employees involved. 6.4 Reports Reports usually follow a clear structure but are not subject to statutory requirements. They often include: • a brief description of the allegation and scope of the investigation; • the steps taken, including interviews and evidence reviewed; • key factual findings and how credibility was assessed; • a conclusion on whether the allegation is support - ed, partially supported or not supported; and • recommended next steps, which may range from no action to disciplinary measures or organisational improvements. Employers aim to produce a document that is factual, neutral and suitable for internal decision-making. 6.5 Information There is no rule prescribed by law regarding the infor - mation provided to the parties on the outcome of an HR internal investigation. As a general rule, complain - ants and respondents are entitled to receive copies of the full investigation report; however, in exception - al cases, due to confidentiality and data protection considerations, this right may be limited to access to relevant parts of the report and/or the provision of a summary thereof. Complainants are typically informed about whether their concerns were substantiated and the general measures that will follow, without dis - closing sensitive information about other individuals. Respondents are informed of the conclusions and any disciplinary actions/measures that directly relate to them. 6.6 Communications to Authorities There is no general rule requiring employers to notify authorities when an internal HR investigation is closed.
183 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook