The appellant was a head teacher at a primary school, of which the second respondent was the governing body, until she was summarily dismissed for gross misconduct in May 2011. The reason for her dismissal was that she had failed to reveal to the school authorities that a male, IS, with whom she was in a close personal relationship, had been convicted in January 2010 of making indecent images of children by downloading them onto his computer. The school considered that the failure to disclose this relationship constituted gross misconduct because it was putting the safety of children at risk. She claimed that after having taken advice from various quarters, she had made a judgment that she was under no obligation to disclose this information. She maintained that position throughout the disciplinary process.
Held: (Elias LJ dissenting) Her appeal was dismissed. The evidence of the association between A and IS was an adequate basis for the panel and tribunal to make the finding which they did.
Elias, Black, Floyd LJJ
 EWCA Civ 766,  IRLR 779,  ELR 329
England and Wales
Appeal from – A v B and Another EAT 20-Feb-2014
EAT Unfair Dismissal – The Employment Tribunal was not wrong in law, or perverse, or in breach of Article 8 to conclude that, in all the circumstances described by the ET, the Respondent decision taker was . .
Appeal from – Reilly v Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council SC 14-Mar-2018
Burchell case remains good law
The appellant head teacher had been dismissed for failing to disclose the fact that her partner had been convicted of a sex offence. She now appealed from rejection of her claim for unfair dismissal.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.567259