Dismissal Of Head Teacher For Failure To Disclose Relationship Was Fair

In Reilly v Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council [2018] UKSC 16 the Supreme Court considered whether it was fair for a school to dismiss a head teacher who was associated with someone who had been convicted of possessing indecent images of children.

Background

Ms Reilly was a head teacher at a primary school. She was in a close personal relationship with a man who was convicted of making indecent images of children. The relationship was not a sexual one and they did not live together but it was nonetheless very close e.g. they owned a property together and spent lots of time with each other.

The Childcare (Disqualification) Regulations 2009 (the "Childcare Regulations") disqualify from registration to provide childcare any person who lives in the same household as a "disqualified person" (which includes anyone who has committed a relevant criminal offence).

Ms Reilly considered that she did not have to disclose the relationship as she did not live with the man and therefore was not "disqualified by association". When the School discovered these facts, after carrying out its disciplinary procedure, it dismissed her for gross misconduct. Ms Reilly brought a claim for unfair dismissal which was dismissed by the employment tribunal which upheld her dismissal as fair. The Employment Appeal Tribunal and Court of Appeal both upheld this finding and Ms Reilly subsequently appealed to the Supreme Court.

Decision

The Supreme Court upheld the employment tribunal's finding that the School's decision to dismiss was within the range of reasonable responses an employer might take. The key reasons were as follows:

Although Ms Reilly was not strictly required to disclose her relationship under the Childcare Regulations, the Supreme Court considered that the Regulations "illumine the democratic judgement about the danger posed to children by such an offender operating through his close associates". Ms Reilly's relationship with a man who represented a danger to children (as evidenced by his conviction) created a risk that the relationship might be exploited so that the man could gain access to children e.g. he would learn about the routines of the School and be more likely than ordinary visitors to gain easy access to School premises. The risk was for the governors to assess, not Ms Reilly. Ms Reilly's failure to disclose the...