If the worst came to the worst, is the process:
Section W Disciplinary Panel > Section W Appeals Panel > Section Y Tribunal > High Court.
Of course, there must be grounds at each stage, but is that it, however unlikely it would be? (I get the point about the potential for this process keeping the panels "honest" even if we think that won't be necessary).
I think that's how it would go, yes. In theory, we might be able to apply to the court after the first panel's ruling, but unless we could show somehow that the process was fatally flawed and should simply be discontinued (and that's a very high bar), the court would probably just refer the matter to the panel to be reconsidered. So it would be pretty pointless, I think, to do anything other than go through all stages and then challenge the final award if, say, we thought the PL's interference had compromised the proceedings throughout.
It's obviously a rather unlikely turn of events. However, I raised it just because some people fear a stitch up, and it's worth noting that there is a legal safeguard. I still expect the panel to do a proper and professional job.