GB - Davies v London Borough of Haringey

Judgment

Mr Justice Supperstone :

Introduction

On 1 June 1992 Mrs Julie Davies, the Claimant, commenced employment with the London Borough of Haringey, the Defendant, as a full-time qualified assistant teacher at Northumberland Park Community School (“the School”). The School is a community school maintained by the Defendant local authority.

In 1997 the Claimant was elected as the Deputy Divisional Secretary of the National Union of Teachers (the “NUT”) for Haringey. She was released from her teaching duties for three days each week to enable her to carry out trade union activities. For the remaining two days she continued in her role as teacher at the school.

From April 2000 the Claimant was released full time from her teaching duties for the purposes of carrying out her trade union activities. She has successfully stood for re-election in this post (or that of Divisional Secretary) every year since 2000 and the arrangement whereby she is released full time from her teaching duties has continued.

By letter dated 17 July 2014 the Defendant suspended the Claimant from her post in accordance with the Defendant’s Disciplinary Procedure which was attached. The suspension has the effect of preventing the Claimant from working as Divisional Secretary of the Union and representing its members in the Defendant Borough. The grounds for suspension allege breaches of the Defendant’s Code of Conduct and Social Media Policy. The complaints made against her did not relate to her teaching.

The Claimant claims that the Defendant has no power to suspend her or take any other disciplinary action against her.

The issue in this case is whether the Defendant has the right to subject the Claimant to disciplinary action or whether only the School has the right to do so.

The parties are agreed that there are only two potentially applicable disciplinary procedures (one being the School’s, the other being the Defendant’s); there is no third procedure; one of the two procedures applies to the Claimant.

Further it is common ground that this court is not concerned with the merits of the decision to suspend the Claimant.

The factual background

The Claimant’s letter of appointment states that:

“You are appointed as a full-time qualified assistant teacher in the employ of the Borough for service on the staff [of] Northumberland Park Community School or such other school maintained by the Borough in which you may be called upon to serve…

Your appointment will date from 1 J