Smo v Hywel Dda University Health Board

Smo v Hywel Dda University Health Board

There is a serious issue to be tried as to whether the Defendant breached contract by commencing and continuing a working relationships investigation during ongoing UPSW disciplinary proceedings, given substantial factual overlap and potential prejudice to the contractual disciplinary process. Damages are not an...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Mr Emad Aldin Smo; Defendant: Hywel Dda University Health Board
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Employment/contract / Interim Injunction Application Pending Trial
Outcome
Interim injunction granted pending trial
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Disciplinary Procedures, Professional Conduct, Working Relationships Investigations, Breach of Contract
Employment Law Contract Law Interim Injunctions Disciplinary Procedures Professional Conduct Working Relationships Investigations Breach of Contract

Source-derived case record

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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Emad Aldin Smo

Claimant

Hywel Dda University Health Board

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Employment/contract / Interim Injunction Application Pending Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant breached the Claimant's contract by commencing and continuing a working relationships investigation during ongoing UPSW disciplinary proceedings
  2. 2 Whether UPSW procedures are contractually applicable to investigations into breakdowns in working relationships
  3. 3 Whether the Defendant is attempting to sidestep contractual disciplinary safeguards

Ratio Decidendi

There is a serious issue to be tried as to whether the Defendant breached contract by commencing and continuing a working relationships investigation during ongoing UPSW disciplinary proceedings, given substantial factual overlap and potential prejudice to the contractual disciplinary process. Damages are not an adequate remedy due to the difficulty in valuing loss of contractual process and professional reputation. The balance of convenience favours granting an interim injunction restraining the Defendant from interviewing the Claimant pending trial.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted pending trial

Orders

  • Defendant and Dr. Diggle restrained from interviewing the Claimant in respect of the working relationships investigation until trial or further order
  • Directions to enable a speedy trial