Neslen & Ors v Evans [2021] EWHC 1909 (QB) (08 July 2021)

Neslen & Ors v Evans [2021] EWHC 1909 (QB) (08 July 2021)

The Labour Party's disciplinary procedures, including use of the unpublished 2018 Code, did not amount to actual procedural unfairness as Claimants received sufficient notice and could make meaningful representations. The Party's acceptance of EHRC recommendations did not render ongoing investigations under the current system unfair, nor did it amount to an unequivocal promise to suspend the process. No breach of contract or procedural fairness was established.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 1909
Parties
Claimant: Diana Neslen; Claimant: Michael Ellman; Claimant: Michael Howard; Claimant: Jonathan Rosenhead; Claimant: Chris Wallis; Claimant: John Davies; Claimant: Colin O'Driscoll; Claimant: Alma Yaniv; Claimant: Sameh Habeeb; Defendant: David Evans
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Claim / Judgment
Outcome
Claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Procedural Fairness, Natural Justice, Disciplinary Proceedings, Anti Semitism, Unincorporated Associations, Equality Act 2010, Codes of Conduct
Contract Law Administrative Law Equality Law Procedural Fairness Natural Justice Disciplinary Proceedings Anti Semitism Unincorporated Associations +2 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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Diana Neslen

Claimant

Michael Ellman

Claimant

Michael Howard

Claimant

Jonathan Rosenhead

Claimant

Chris Wallis

Claimant

John Davies

Claimant

Colin O'Driscoll

Claimant

Alma Yaniv

Claimant

Sameh Habeeb

Claimant

David Evans

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Labour Party's use of an unpublished Code of Conduct in disciplinary proceedings breached procedural fairness and contract
  2. 2 Whether ongoing investigations under the existing disciplinary system are unfair given the Party's acceptance of EHRC recommendations
  3. 3 Whether the Party mis-stated confidentiality obligations in Notices of Investigation

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Party's disciplinary procedures, including use of the unpublished 2018 Code, did not amount to actual procedural unfairness as Claimants received sufficient notice and could make meaningful representations. The Party's acceptance of EHRC recommendations did not render ongoing investigations under the current system unfair, nor did it amount to an unequivocal promise to suspend the process. No breach of contract or procedural fairness was established.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed