NORWAY Law and Practice Contributed by: Thomas Talén, Øyvind Clausen Bade, Marte Dahl and Marianne Viset, Ro Sommernes Advokatfirma AS
The relevant standard of proof depends on the nature of the investigation and the character of the allega - tions. While the ordinary balance of probabilities serves as a starting point, a higher standard of proof may be applied where the assessment could result in substantial criticism or significant legal consequences for the person concerned. 6. Conclusion and Outcome of an HR Internal Investigation 6.1 Deciding to End an HR Internal Investigation There are no specific rules in Norwegian law govern - ing when an HR internal investigation may be ended. The employer must assess when sufficient informa - tion has been obtained to conclude, but generally a case involving a notice of concern should not take longer than necessary, and the employer should have completed the investigation within a reasonable time - frame. As mentioned in 1.1 Circumstances , the extent of the investigation will vary from case to case. In some cases, it is possible to conclude after a preliminary investigation. 6.2 Procedure for Ending an HR Internal Investigation Norwegian law does not prescribe specific procedural requirements that must be followed at the end of an HR internal investigation; however, it is advisable to inform the Reporter and the Respondent of the out - come (see 6.5 Information ). Whilst investigation into a notice of concern may iden - tify workplace issues, such investigations rarely pro - vide resolution for those issues. At the conclusion of any case involving a notice of concern, the need for remedial measures relating to the matters reported, or the workplace more generally, should always be assessed. 6.3 Conclusion Unless the business has specific guidelines regarding the conclusion as part of the established procedures for internal whistle-blowing, there are no specific rules
governing the form that the conclusion must take. Internal processes are, however, based on a principle of proper case handling, and the conclusion should be traceable for the future. This means that the investiga - tion should result in a written assessment/summary. For investigations conducted by external investiga - tors, recommendations regarding conclusion and outcome follow the guidelines of the Norwegian Bar Association. According to the guidelines, the assign - ment must be based on a mandate from the employer which shall also specify what outcome the investiga - tion should result in. Normally this is a written report in response to the mandate. 6.4 Reports In Norway, there are no statutory laws governing reports. However, guidelines for reports may follow from specific internal business procedures, or from the mandate for an investigation conducted by exter - nal investigators. As mentioned in 6.3 Conclusion , the conclusion will normally be set out in a written report, in line with the principle of proper case handling and what is typically specified in the mandate for external investigations. 6.5 Information According to the guidelines from the Norwegian Bar Association, the parties “affected” by the HR internal investigations have the right to be notified of the out - come of the investigations affecting them, but they do not have the right to receive the full report. The affected parties also have the right to be informed of the outcome before, or at the same time as, the final report is ready. This right may only be varied under special circumstances. The term “affected” implies that the investigation and its outcome must have significance for the individual’s situation and is decided on a case-by-case basis. The Reporter may have a right of access under data protection rules. It is recommended that employers have internal procedures for handling such access requests. The Respondent also has a right of access to personal data concerning them. For more details on access to personal data, see 7.3 Access .
296 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook