Search

How can we help?

Icon

Head teacher’s failure to disclose relationship was gross misconduct

This week (in Reilly v Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council), the Supreme Court, has found that a head teacher’s failure to disclose her relationship with a man who had been convicted of making indecent images of children justified her dismissal.

The Claimant had a close relationship with the man, was aware of his arrest (and the reasons for this) and continued to have a relationship with him after his conviction.  She sought advice from various people about whether she was under a duty to report this (including governors of other schools, a police officer and the Criminal Records Bureau) and came to the conclusion that it was not necessary.  On discovery of this relationship, the school dismissed the Claimant for gross misconduct on the basis that her failure to disclose this was a serious breach of her duties to assist the school in safeguarding its pupils.

The Employment Tribunal dismissed the Claimant’s unfair dismissal claim.  It held that although the obligation to disclose was not expressly in the Claimant’s contract, it was obvious that failing to disclose this was misconduct.  Ms Reilly lost her appeals to the Employment Appeal Tribunal, Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.

The Employment Tribunal dismissed the Claimant’s unfair dismissal claim.

The Supreme Court found:

  • Ms Reilly’s had made wide-ranging inquiries into the circumstances which triggered the duty, which showed that she even she recognised how near her case was to the border-line.
  • The governors were the objective decision makers and they decided the case fell on the side of the line which required disclosure. The man was the subject of a serious, recent conviction. The basis of his sentence was that he represented a danger to children. His relationship with the head of the school created, at the very least, a potential risk to the children. It was for the governors, not Ms Reilly, to assess the risk.
  • If she had disclosed the relationship, it is highly unlikely that she would have been dismissed or that it would have been fair to dismiss her.
  • The governors would probably have made Ms Reilly promise not to allow the man to enter the school premises and promise that outside the school she would not leave information about pupils in places potentially accessible to him.
  • The tribunal was entitled to conclude that it was a reasonable response for the governors to find that Ms Reilly’s non-disclosure not only amounted to a breach of duty but also merited her dismissal.
  • Her refusal to accept that she had been in breach of duty suggested a continuing lack of insight which, it was reasonable for the tribunal to conclude, made it inappropriate for her to continue to run the school.

This case is a reminder to employees that concealing information such as this may well be more of an issue than the underlying facts that were being concealed.  Had the employee in this case approached her school’s governors, as oppose to everyone else, it is likely she would have retained her role.

About this article

Disclaimer
This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

art
  • 21 May 2025
  • Employment

The Rise of Side Hustles and Polygamous Working

In the evolving world of work, the rise of side hustles and “polygamous working” is reshaping the employment landscape in the UK.

Pub
  • 16 May 2025
  • Employment

London Seminar – Understanding the Employment Rights Bill: Legal changes and what they mean for HR

We are pleased to invite you to an in-person seminar at our London office on Tuesday 24th June, hosted by our Employment Law team. Join Monica Atwal, Managing Partner; Katie Glendinning, Partner; and Amanda Glover, Associate, as they unpack the legal implications of the new Employment Rights Bill and what it means for your organisation.

Pub
  • 16 May 2025
  • Employment

Reading Seminar – Understanding the Employment Rights Bill: Legal changes and what they mean for HR

We are pleased to invite you to an in-person seminar at our Reading office Tuesday 17th June hosted by our Employment Law team. Join Monica Atwal, Managing Partner, Katie Glendinning, Partner and Amanda Glover, Associate, will unpack the legal implications of the new Employment Rights Bill and what it means for your organisation.

Pub
  • 15 May 2025
  • Employment

TUPE Podcast Series – Information and Consultation Obligations

In this ninth episode of our TUPE Podcast Series, Katie Glendinning, a Partner in the employment team, will examine the information and consultation obligations under TUPE.

Pub
  • 12 May 2025
  • Employment

Talking Employment Law: The Employment Rights Bill – Part 2

In part two of the Employment Rights Bill podcast series, Louise Keenan and Melanie Pimenta, members of the employment team, will discuss changes to collective redundancies, flexible working and sick pay.

art
  • 08 May 2025
  • Employment

Statutory Sick Pay Scheme changes: how can employers prepare for such changes?

The government has recently changed the Statutory Sick Pay provisions; it is anticipated that such changes will ‘help people to stay in work and grow the economy’.