BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions >> Edwards v Williamson & Anor [2002] EWCA Civ 1020 (18 June 2002) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2002/1020.html Cite as: [2002] EWCA Civ 1020 |
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
CIVIL DIVISION
ON APPEAL FROM LEEDS COUNTY COURT
(His Honour Judge Hawkesworth QC
The Strand London Tuesday 18 June 2002 |
||
B e f o r e :
MR JUSTICE WALL
____________________
CHRISTOPHER STUART EDWARDS | Claimant/Applicant | |
and: | ||
SUSAN WILLIAMSON, THE CHAIRMAN | ||
& THE GOVERNORS OF HANSON SCHOOL | Defendants/Respondents |
____________________
appeared on behalf of the Applicant
MR DINGEMANS QC (instructed by Berrymans Lace Mawr, Salisbury House, London Wall, London EC2M)
appeared on behalf of the Respondents
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
Tuesday 18 June 2002
"However, assuming that at the end of the academic year 1996/97 he was told that his attendance record was still not satisfactory enough for him to be considered for A-level teaching, it is probable that, having regard to the sense of injustice he would have felt over the depressive episode earlier in the year, and the sense that yet again he was being unfairly denied A-level teaching, he would have reacted in the Summer/Autumn of 1997 in the same way that he did in the Summer/Autumn of 1996. The likelihood that he would have taken this on the chin and completed the academic year 1997/98 without any significant absence, would appear to be low. This is because he would have had a persisting sense of injustice and he would have been in a vulnerable state in terms of being at risk of experiencing an exacerbation or relapse of his depression in response to bad news."
"While on my finding, fair and proper treatment by the defendants would not have involved a disciplinary hearing following his return to work in 1997, the claimant's deep-seated and persisting sense of justice would inevitably have caused him to react badly, both to any failure to give him higher ability classes to teach and, indeed, to any legitimate attempt by the school to address the issue of his absence from work, whether due to stress-related illness or other causes. Although, therefore, I accept that the disciplinary procedure and hearing did materially contribute to the relapse of his illness which led to the claimant being given a certificate of incapacity to work on the 9th April 1997, to quote directly from the joint memorandum of the experts, I am not persuaded that this relapse was any more than a temporary exacerbation of a condition which was bound to resurface sooner or later had he remained at work. In the event, I consider it probable that the claimant would have continued to react with paranoid sensitivity towards [the headmaster] and the senior teaching staff had he remained at work, and any perceived criticisms of his teaching abilities or absences from work would have caused a recurrence of his depressive illness and therefore his dismissal on the grounds of incapacity in any event."