Agoreyo v London Borough of Lambeth [2017] EWHC 2019 (QB) (15 August 2017)

Agoreyo v London Borough of Lambeth [2017] EWHC 2019 (QB) (15 August 2017)

The High Court held that the defendant's decision to suspend the claimant was not a neutral act and was taken without reasonable and proper cause, as there was no evidence that alternatives to suspension were considered or that the claimant's account was sought before suspension. The suspension letter did not justify the action on grounds of child protection, and the process failed to comply with statutory guidance requiring consideration of alternatives. The suspension constituted a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 2019
Parties
Appellant/claimant: Simone Agoreyo; Respondent/defendant: London Borough of Lambeth
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 August 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal (breach of Contract/constructive Dismissal) / High Court (queen's Bench Division) Appeal From County Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment for the claimant on liability for breach of contract (implied term of trust and confidence).
Legal Topics
Constructive Dismissal, Implied Term of Trust and Confidence, Suspension of Teachers, Use of Reasonable Force in Schools, Statutory Guidance Compliance
Employment Law Education Law Contract Law Constructive Dismissal Implied Term of Trust and Confidence Suspension of Teachers Use of Reasonable Force in Schools Statutory Guidance Compliance

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Simone Agoreyo

Appellant/claimant

London Borough of Lambeth

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (breach of Contract/constructive Dismissal) / High Court (queen's Bench Division) Appeal From County Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant breached the implied term of trust and confidence by suspending the claimant
  2. 2 Whether the suspension was a reasonable and proper response to the allegations
  3. 3 Whether the defendant failed to comply with statutory and policy guidance on suspension and support for teachers

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held that the defendant's decision to suspend the claimant was not a neutral act and was taken without reasonable and proper cause, as there was no evidence that alternatives to suspension were considered or that the claimant's account was sought before suspension. The suspension letter did not justify the action on grounds of child protection, and the process failed to comply with statutory guidance requiring consideration of alternatives. The suspension constituted a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment for the claimant on liability for breach of contract (implied term of trust and confidence).

Orders

  • Judgment set aside
  • Finding of breach of contract (implied term of trust and confidence) entered against the defendant