Safeguarding children is a paramount consideration. But what happens if a former teacher asserts that his rights prevent safeguarding information being disclosed to the police?
This was the issue which the High Court had to consider in the recent case of Camurat v Thurrock Borough Council. Mr Camurat was head of languages at Belhouse Chase Specialist Humanities College. Various issues arose during his employment and eventually his employment was ended on terms contained in a settlement agreement. Amongst other provisions, the agreement stated that any written reference which any third party may request would be in the terms of the reference set out in a schedule to the agreement. The reference was largely favourable although it did include mention of a final written warning which had been issued to him.
Following termination of his employment, the college received a request from the police to provide them with information, as a result of which the college supplied a detailed account. This resulted in an enhanced Criminal Record Certificate being issued containing details supplied by the college. Mr Camurat said that, as a result, he lost employment that he had obtained in a school in Blackheath.
He therefore brought claims against his former employer making various allegations, including breach of the settlement agreement for providing written information to the police (a third party) which went beyond the terms of the reference, and breach of the duty of care which he said he was owed by his former employer.
The High Court concluded that the college was not restricted to the terms of the agreed reference when providing information to the police. The judge said that the words ‘any third party’ in the agreement must mean any potential future employer, not the police or anybody interested in safeguarding issues.
The court also ruled that there is no justification for imposing a duty of care on an employer which would discourage an employer in good faith providing assistance to the police on safeguarding issues.
The contents of this article are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article.
Related insights
Spring clean your business’s contracts and policies
As your business grows and the legal landscape continues to shift, scheduling an annual “spring clean” of your contracts and internal policies is a smart way to stay compliant and…
Read moreEmployment Law Round-Up June 2024
Click the links below to read more about the changes in employment law in June: Tribunal claims increase as some employers end WFH EAT says employer breached contract by refusing…
Read moreImplications of the Justin Forsyth story for employer references. Do new questions of balance arise?
It was reported last week that Justin Forsyth faced a formal grievance from a female colleague before resigning from Save the Children, as opposed to an informal complaint resolved via a confidential…
Read moreInsolvency and restructuring network update
Two recent judicial decisions highlight the importance of taking specialist employment and insolvency advice when dealing with employees in an insolvency or restructuring situation The first case centres on a group employment…
Read moreBrexit impact on employment law – Parliamentary briefing published
The House of Commons has produced a briefing paper entitled “Brexit: Impact Across Policy Areas” which states that David Davis MP is not attracted by the idea of rewarding those…
Read more