In Agoreyo v London Borough of Lambeth, the High Court held that the suspension of a teacher because of allegations that she used unreasonable force against two children was a breach of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence.
NEWS
In Agoreyo v London Borough of Lambeth, the High Court held that the suspension of a teacher because of allegations that she used unreasonable force against two children was a breach of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence.
DETAILS
In Agoreyo, the appellant was a teacher who was suspended from work because of allegations that she used unreasonable force in three separate incidents involving two children who were difficult to control. She had requested, and was told that she would be given, more help and assistance from management in controlling the two children. The allegations were that the appellant had dragged one of the children, very aggressively, a few feet down the corridor whilst shouting at him. The headteacher had previously investigated two of the incidents and not considered them worthy of disciplinary action. Before her suspension, the appellant was not asked for her response to the allegations and there was no suggestion that consideration had been given to alternatives to suspension. The appellant resigned the same day as the suspension.
At the County Court, the appellant alleged breach of contract. The court dismissed her claim against the local authority for damages for breach of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence.
However, the High Court reversed this decision. Following two previous cases (Mezey and Gogay), it held that suspension was not a neutral act and especially in the context of a professional such as a teacher. The court concluded that the local authority had not followed the statutory guidance for local authorities which says that suspension should not be the default option and all other options should be considered before suspending. The court held that the suspension was a knee-jerk reaction which amounted to a repudiatory breach of contract. The reason given by the local authority for the suspension was not the protection of children but to “allow the investigation to be conducted fairly”. The appellant’s friendly resignation letter did not undermine the repudiatory breach.
Factors which contributed to the decision that the local authority had breached the implied term of trust and confidence were the fact that the headteacher had previously investigated two of the incidents and took no further disciplinary action. Further, the appellant was suspended a few days after she was told she would be given a scheme of support to help with the two children which had not yet been fully implemented.
COMMENT
Simon deMaid comments: "This case serves as a reminder to all employers, particularly those in the education sector, that suspension should not be the default position on receipt of an allegation of gross misconduct against an employee. Instead, consideration should be given to the particular circumstances, any applicable statutory guidance and whether there is an appropriate alternative option to suspension.”
