Byrnell v British Telecommunications & Anor

Byrnell v British Telecommunications & Anor

There is no general common law or contractual duty to provide a reference unless specifically agreed. The reference provided, though brief, satisfied the contractual obligation under the compromise agreement. The compromise agreement complied with section 203 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The advice given by the second defendant (solicitor) was not negligent in the circumstances. The claimant's claims against both defendants had no reasonable prospect of success and were properly struck out.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Charles Byrnell; 1st Respondent/defendant: British Telecommunications; 2nd Respondent/defendant: Mr Stanbury
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Judgment of Master Rose on Strike Out and Refusal to Strike Out Claims
Outcome
Appeal dismissed as against the first defendant; appeal allowed as against the second defendant; all claims struck out.
Legal Topics
Compromise Agreements, References (employment), Negligence of Legal Advisers, Unfair Dismissal, Misrepresentation, Conspiracy to Cause Economic Loss
Employment Law Contract Law Tort Law Compromise Agreements References (employment) Negligence of Legal Advisers Unfair Dismissal Misrepresentation +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Byrnell

Appellant/claimant

British Telecommunications

1st Respondent/defendant

Mr Stanbury

2nd Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Judgment of Master Rose on Strike Out and Refusal to Strike Out Claims

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a contractual or common law duty to provide a reference
  2. 2 Whether the compromise agreement complied with section 203 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
  3. 3 Whether the advice given by the second defendant (solicitor) was negligent

Ratio Decidendi

There is no general common law or contractual duty to provide a reference unless specifically agreed. The reference provided, though brief, satisfied the contractual obligation under the compromise agreement. The compromise agreement complied with section 203 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The advice given by the second defendant (solicitor) was not negligent in the circumstances. The claimant's claims against both defendants had no reasonable prospect of success and were properly struck out.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed as against the first defendant; appeal allowed as against the second defendant; all claims struck out.

Orders

  • Claim against British Telecommunications struck out.
  • Claim against Mr Stanbury struck out.