header-logo header-logo

29 April 2010
Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Shoesmith loses dismissal challenge

Judicial review application refused for Baby P’s children’s services director
Former Haringey children’s services director, Sharon Shoesmith has lost her legal challenge over her dismissal in the wake of the Baby P tragedy.
Mr Justice Foskett dismissed her judicial review application last week (R (Shoesmith) v Ofsted and Ors [2010] EWHC 852 (Admin)), but criticised Ofsted, Haringey Council and children’s secretary, Ed Balls, for their handling of the issue.

Peter Connolly (Baby P) died in 2007 and, following the criminal trial in 2008, Balls asked Ofsted to produce a report. Once this was produced, Balls appointed replacements for Shoesmith and her deputy, and Haringey councillors summarily dismissed Shoesmith with no compensation.

Foskett J said the employment tribunal was the appropriate forum for deciding whether Shoesmith was unfairly dismissed. However, he said that “simply because the Ofsted report was in the terms it was, and the secretary of state acted as he did and he, others and various national newspapers called for the claimant’s summary dismissal was no proper justification for taking such an approach and it created the appearance of an unfair process”.

Shoesmith sought a judicial review on the grounds the process of her dismissal breached principles of natural justice and was unfair.
She claimed Balls had been improperly influenced by political and media pressure in removing her.

In a lengthy judgment, Foskett J rejected this as “too simplistic” and said he could find “no sustainable basis” for the allegation that Balls or his officials interfered in the Ofsted report.

He found that Ofsted had met its obligation of fairness even though Shoesmith was given no opportunity to respond to the report prior to publication.

A statement released by Beachcroft LLP, solicitors for Shoesmith, says: “We are disappointed that, despite the serious criticisms made by the judge of Ofsted, the secretary of state and Haringey council, the judge has not upheld Sharon’s claim for judicial review. 

“We nevertheless welcome the finding that Haringey acted unfairly in dismissing Sharon.”

Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Commercial firm strengthens real estate disputes team with associate hire

Switalskis—three appointments

Switalskis—three appointments

Firm appoints three directors to board

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Six promoted to partner and one to legal director across UK and Ireland offices

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll