Smith v Trafford Housing Trust [2012] EWHC 3221 (Ch) (16 November 2012)

Smith v Trafford Housing Trust [2012] EWHC 3221 (Ch) (16 November 2012)

The claimant's Facebook postings did not amount to misconduct under the employment contract, Code of Conduct, or Equal Opportunities Policy. The postings were personal, not made on behalf of the Trust, did not promote religious views in a proselytising manner, and did not mistreat colleagues. The Trust was not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 3221 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Mr Adrian Smith; Defendant: Trafford Housing Trust
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Breach of Contract Claim (employment) / High Court Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed; breach of contract found against the defendant.
Legal Topics
Disciplinary Proceedings, Freedom of Expression, Religious Belief in Employment, Breach of Contract, Employment Policies, Social Media Conduct
Employment Law Contract Law Disciplinary Proceedings Freedom of Expression Religious Belief in Employment Breach of Contract Employment Policies Social Media Conduct

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Adrian Smith

Claimant

Trafford Housing Trust

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Breach of Contract Claim (employment) / High Court Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's Facebook postings constituted misconduct under the employment contract, Code of Conduct, or Equal Opportunities Policy
  2. 2 Whether the Trust was contractually entitled to demote the claimant and reduce his pay as a disciplinary sanction
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's conduct brought the Trust into disrepute, promoted religious views in breach of policy, or mistreated colleagues

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's Facebook postings did not amount to misconduct under the employment contract, Code of Conduct, or Equal Opportunities Policy. The postings were personal, not made on behalf of the Trust, did not promote religious views in a proselytising manner, and did not mistreat colleagues. The Trust was not contractually entitled to demote the claimant or reduce his pay for these postings. The demotion constituted a breach of contract.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; breach of contract found against the defendant.

Orders

  • Declaration that the Trust breached the claimant's contract by demoting him and reducing his pay.
  • Damages to be assessed in accordance with the contractual notice period and mitigation principles.