Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

TIn the case of London Borough of Lambeth v Simone Agoreyo
[2019] EWCA Civ 322, the Court of Appeal held that the High Court had been wrong to overturn the decision of the County Court who had dismissed a teacher’s claim for damages for breach of contract, holding that her employer had been entitled to suspend her after allegations of misconduct towards two students came to light.

The factual background of London Borough of Lambeth v Simone Agoreyo

Ms Agoreyo (the ‘Claimant’) was employed by the London Borough of Lambeth (the ‘Respondent’) as a primary school teacher. In her class were two pupils (O and Z) who exhibited behavioural difficulties and whom she struggled to teach.

In the first few weeks of her employment at the school, 3 incidents occurred in which the Claimant was alleged to have used physical force against one or other of the children. These included dragging a child across the floor, dragging a child down a corridor while shouting at them and picking up a child when they refused to leave the class.

Following the three incidents, the Respondent was suspended by the Head Teacher pending an investigation. The suspension letter stated that suspension was a precautionary act pending a full investigation into the allegations.  It also stated that the suspension was a ‘neutral action and not a disciplinary action’.  However, before the decision to suspend was taken, the Claimant wasn’t asked for her comments on the allegations, nor did the school provide any evidence to suggest that it had considered other alternatives to suspension.

The Claimant resigned the same day and went on to make a claim for breach of contract in the County Court, alleging that the Respondent had committed a repudiatory breach of the implied term of trust and confidence by suspending her.

The decision of the County Court

The Claimant lost in the County Court when it held that the school had ‘reasonable and proper cause’’ to suspend her after receiving reports of the allegations against her and that suspension was necessary because of the school’s overriding duty to protect the children pending a full investigation. There was therefore no repudiatory breach of contract and the claim was dismissed.

The Claimant appealed to the High Court.

The decision of the High Court

The Claimant successfully appealed the decision. The High Court held that the suspension was a “knee-jerk reaction” which was contrary to the decision in Gogay v Hertfordshire County Council [2000] IRLR 703. The suspension was therefore a repudiatory breach of the implied term of trust and confidence because it had not been “reasonable and/or necessary” for the Claimant to be suspended pending the investigation.

It also concluded that suspension was not a “neutral act”, relying on Mezey v South West London and St George’s Mental Health NHS Trust [2007] EWCA Civ 10.

The decision of the Court of Appeal

The Claimant appealed against the decision of the High Court on the following three grounds:

  1. That the findings of the High Court Judge on whether there had been a breach of the implied term was a substitution of his own judgment for the trial judge’s findings of fact.
  2. That it was wrong to treat the suspension as anything other than a “neutral act”.
  3. That applying a test of whether the suspension was “reasonable and/or necessary” was wrong in law and the correct test was whether the Respondent had reasonable and proper cause to suspend the Claimant.

The Claimant’s case was that the High Court’s findings were permissible in light of the County Court’s errors of law, that suspension was not a neutral act (relying on Mezey), and that their application of Gogay was correct in law.

The Court of Appeal concluded that the appeal succeeded on Grounds 1 and 3.  Ground 2 was rejected as the court did not consider the question of whether suspension was a “neutral act” to be helpful for determining whether there had been a breach of the implied term.

The Court of Appeal held that High court judge had substituted his own view of the facts for those of the trial judge. Whether an act constituted a repudiatory breach of the implied term was one of fact, as was whether the Respondent’s conduct had been reasonable. The trial judge had been entitled to find as he did on the basis of the evidence in front of him, and no error of law had been identified which would permit these findings to be overturned.

The Court of Appeal also held that, whilst suspension was conduct which could constitute a repudiatory breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, there is no test of “necessity” in determining whether an employer is entitled to suspend an employee. In Gogay the suspension had been without reasonable and proper cause, but that did not mean that any suspension would be a breach of the implied term unless the employer could show it was necessary.  This was a highly fact-sensitive question and not a question of law.

Our solicitors’ views on the case of London Borough of Lambeth v Simone Agoreyo

Sacha Barrett, a Senior Associate in the employment department at Redmans, made the following comment on the case: “This case confirms that the decision to suspend an employee should never be taken lightly as it is not a neutral act, at least in relation to the employment of a qualified professional.  Whenever an employer is considering suspending an employee, they should make sure there is ‘reasonable and proper cause’ to justify the suspension.”

The decision of the Court of Appeal in London Borough of Lambeth v Simone Agoreyo [2019] EWCA Civ 322can be found here.

About

Redmans Employment Team deal with employment matters for both employers and employees, including drafting employment contracts and policies, advising employers and employees on compromise agreements, handling day-to-day HR issues, advising on restructures, and handling Employment Tribunal cases for both employers and employees Call 020 3397 3603 to speak to one of the members of our employment team or email us on enquiries@redmans.co.uk. Redmans have offices in Richmond, Chiswick, Hammersmith, Fulham, Kingston, Wimbledon, Ealing, Kings Cross and Marylebone (meetings strictly by appointment only).

Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

Share →

Our awards

Request a callback

    Your first name (required)

    Your last name (required)

    Your email (required)

    Your telephone number (required)

    Brief details of your enquiry

    Contact us

    Please feel free to discuss your own position and concerns. Contact your nearest office on:

    T: 020 3397 3603
    E: enquiries@redmans.co.uk
    W: www.redmans.co.uk

    Testimonials

    4.76 Average

    235 Reviews

    Paul O

    Chris & Rana guided me through a redundancy discussion. Prompt & patient assistance with the documents & meetings. Clear advice & fast responses regarding negotiations. Would definitely recommend & would use again without hesitation.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Anonymous

    Outstanding, efficient service. Thank you so much!

    Posted 1 month ago

    Jaswant S

    Very very happy with the good service I got Thank you so much for your help

    Posted 1 month ago

    Anonymous

    Mel and Chris were fantastic and supportive throughout! 1000% recommend.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Emma D

    Good responsive service

    Posted 1 month ago

    Mike T

    Good efficient service.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Brenda G

    Very professional and helpful

    Posted 1 month ago

    Charles A

    Chris Hadrill was recommended to me when I found myself in need of a solicitor at very short notice. He contacted me almost immediately to arrange a call. Chris handled my case in a professional and timely manner and kept me notified throughout. Chris inspired confidence and made me feel I was being cared for. If ever I'm in need of legal representation, I would not hesitate to contact Chris. And will gladly recommend him to family and friends.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Rosalind R

    I was very happy with the service that I received from Redmans Solicitors. They were able to advise me accordingly with regards to my employment matter and stay within the agreed costing.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Karl B

    Caroline and Chris were so helpful and friendly. Couldn't of asked for a better service.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Dimitrios P

    Excellent, professional service, in time and within the expected value.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Barbara K

    Everything quickly and fairly. Very professional. Thank you.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Sabrina J

    I received a efficient professional service during the whole process of liasing between myself and my former employer to getting all forms signed and receiving my redundancy payment in full in the summer of this year.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Anonymous

    I received legal advice on a redundancy settlement agreement from Redmans Solicitors and was very impressed by the quality of their service. Chris Hadrill is highly experienced in settlement matters and was especially understanding of the particulars of my case, going out of his way to ensure that it was resolved quickly and with the utmost professionalism. I have no hesitation in recommending Redmans to anyone in need of employment advice and settlement resolution.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Anonymous

    Excellent service, with full explanations of everything needed. Both Chris and Mel answered all emails very promptly and were personable and efficient.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Anonymous

    I would like to thank Chris Hadrill, in particular who handled my case, for all his hard work, expertise and dedication. He listened with empathy and offered suitable advice, which made me feel valued and confident through a difficult time. I would highly recommend Chris and the team at Redmans Solicitors. Thank you.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Yann G

    Yann Guezennec / Chris Hadrill - Thanks for the detailed, informed and professional advice for my settlement. When comprise is the rule I felt we could have been maybe a bit more aggressive from the start. However an acceptable outcome considering the situation. Thank you

    Posted 1 month ago

    Valentina D

    Great service from Mel, she was very good at explaining every part of the settlement agreement and very efficient dealing with the HR team. Very professional team, I would definitely use them again in future if the opportunity came up.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Olaf S

    I was very happy with the service that I have received. Thank You Regards

    Posted 1 month ago

    Rebecca A

    I had a wonderful solicitor called Caroline who was so helpful and gave me all the information I need and explained everything in detail so I was crystal clear. Would highly recommend if you are in need of a solicitor!

    Posted 1 month ago

    Gareth J

    Very efficient, helpful and pragmatic support from Caroline. Happy to work with my requirements / suggestions but also made some very good points which helped to achieve a higher settlement amount. Would highly recommend Caroline and Chris.

    Posted 1 month ago