Every year around this time, organisations roll out the usual reminders
“Be respectful at the Christmas party.”
“Drink responsibly.”
“Remember it’s still a work function.”

But a recent Supreme Court decision involving a former senior partner at a Big Four consulting firm offers a far more meaningful lesson one that goes well beyond festive-season etiquette.

This case isn’t really about one bad Christmas party.
 It is about leadership accountability, behaviour outside work, and the very real consequences of breaching professional and organisational expectations.

Here’s what happened and what every employer (and senior employee) should take from it.

The case in brief

Two incidents, one Just Cause termination

A senior partner, who re-joined the firm in 2021, was dismissed after two incidents

Inappropriate conduct at the firm’s delayed Christmas party

At a themed “Miami Vice” celebration, he made inappropriate comments to a female partner, remarks about wanting to sleep with her and claiming “most of his affairs are with married women.” The firm issued a first and final warning.

A bar altercation and failure to disclose criminal charges

After a fundraising event in 2023, he became involved in a confrontation with a bar manager over a missing jacket. CCTV showed him pushing and chest-bumping the manager. Police charged him with common assault. He then failed to promptly disclose the charge to:

  • The Country Managing Partner
  • The NSW Law Society (as required professionally)

The firm investigated and terminated his partnership for Just Cause.

The ACT Supreme Court upheld the dismissal in full, ruling that the conduct although partly outside work hours fell well within the scope of “Just Cause” because it had the potential to significantly damage the firm’s interests.

This was not about a Christmas party. It was about trust and risk. The most important takeaway from the court’s ruling is this. Misconduct outside the office can absolutely justify dismissal, especially for senior employees.

The court noted that the definition of “Just Cause” did not require the behaviour to occur:

  • At work
  • During work hours
  • While performing work duties

Instead, the question was whether the behaviour was likely to significantly harm the firm’s interests. For senior leaders, the bar is much higher because:

  • They represent the organisation publicly
  • Their conduct influences culture
  • They carry far greater reputational and legal risk
  • They are expected to uphold professional standards at all times

The failure to disclose the criminal charge was particularly damaging. For regulated professionals, transparency is not optional, it is an obligation.

What this means for employers and leaders

“Out of hours” conduct is not untouchable – If the behaviour risks your reputation, damages trust, or breaches professional standards, it can justify disciplinary action, including termination.

Warnings must be meaningful – The firm issued a first and final warning after the Christmas party.
This set clear expectations and consequences, which the court later relied on heavily.

Roles with regulatory obligations carry added responsibility – Professionals who must report criminal charges (lawyers, financial advisers, health professionals, etc.) cannot treat disclosure as optional or discretionary.

Seniority increases, not decreases, accountability – Senior employees and partners are held to a higher behavioural standard because their actions have organisational consequences.

Culture, risk, and behaviour are not “HR issues,” they are leadership issues.

This case underscores the importance of:

  • Clear behavioural expectations
  • Early intervention
  • Consistent application of policies
  • Senior role modelling

So, what should companies do as we head into social-event season?

Instead of relying on generic “behave yourselves” reminders, focus on:

1. Clear, practical behavioural expectations – Explain what’s acceptable, not just what’s not.

2. Reinforcing obligations for senior and regulated staff – Disclosure duties, reputational responsibilities, and higher expectations.

3. Realistic risk management – If alcohol is involved, plan for supervision, safe travel options, and clear boundaries.

4. Consistent follow-through – Warnings, investigations, and consequences must be applied consistently – not selectively.

5. Support for people who raise concerns – Encourage staff to speak up and ensure complaints are handled properly and promptly.

The real lesson? Professional behaviour is not optional

End-of-year celebrations are just one setting where issues can arise but they’re not the root of the problem. This case highlights something deeper. Professional conduct applies everywhere, not just in the office.

Trust is the currency of senior leadership.
And when that trust is compromised, employers are entitled to act. As the holiday season approaches, organisations should focus less on reminding staff to “behave at the Christmas party” and more on fostering a culture where expectations are clear, behaviour is accountable, and leaders understand the responsibility that comes with their role.

If this case has highlighted gaps or risks in your own workplace policies, expectations, or leadership practices, now is the perfect time to act, before issues arise.

Christine Howitz – Director

Find our articles helpful? Remember to follow us on Facebook, Instagram or LinkedIn to keep up to date with our practical tips and information for business owners and managers.