Former Leicester City Council chief executive Sheila Lock fails in court battle over dismissal
Former Leicester City Council chief executive Sheila Lock has lost a High Court challenge against her dismissal.
Ms Lock was made redundant from her £174,000 post last year when Sir Peter Soulsby abolished the position on becoming the city's elected mayor.
-
Former Leicester City Council chief executive Sheila Lock
The ousted chief executive launched a judicial review challenge to decisions leading up to her dismissal, claiming the council breached her human rights to a fair hearing and respect for her private life.
Yesterday, a senior judge criticised the "infelicitous and ill-judged" way the news of her dismissal was broken to her – but threw out her case.
Cheap Van Insurance For 17,18 & 19 Year Old Drivers - Call Insure365 01782 898188, Free Legal Expenses Cover Included Valued at £25.00!
Terms: 1 Voucher Per Customer
Contact: 01782 898188
Valid until: Saturday, June 22 2013
Despite the council's legal victory, its former top officer is now expected to resume an employment tribunal against the authority, which was suspended pending the High Court ruling.
Judge Roger Kaye QC told the High Court in Leeds that in July last year, Ms Lock was off work due to the stress caused by a four-year harassment campaign by a council worker, who has since been jailed.
While she was off work, she was sent a letter telling her the role was to be "deleted" and to "treat this letter as a formal notice of redundancy".
The full council approved the abolition of the chief executive role the following month and, after an in-house appeal was rejected, Ms Lock was dismissed and given four months notice until December 2011.
At the High Court, she challenged the process leading to her departure, claiming the council acted unlawfully by sending her a letter of redundancy before the full council had ratified the abolition of her role.
Ms Lock also claimed that by informing the media she was off sick and automatically dismissing her from her other role of head of paid service, the council breached her human rights to a fair hearing and privacy.
However, Judge Kaye rejected her claims the dismissal was unlawful, ruling: "I can well understand the criticisms of the infelicitous and ill-judged language and drafting of the July letter.
"But it has to be remembered that the letter is just that; it is not a lease or mortgage and must be read reasonably and sensibly and in context as it would be understood by a reasonable person reading it with relevant knowledge." He concluded there was a "legitimate interest" in the media knowing she was ill.
He said: "In my judgment, despite the infelicitous wording of the July letter, there has been no material irregularity, unlawfulness, unfairness or irrationality in the decision to dismiss her as chief executive and as a person who was the designated head of paid service."
A city council spokesman confirmed that Ms Lock's application had been unsuccessful but said: "In view of the possibility of an appeal it would be inappropriate to comment further at this stage."
The Mercury tried to contact Ms Lock and Sir Peter Soulsby about the judgment, but was unable to reach them.
Comments
by wanlip
Sunday, August 12 2012, 9:31AM
“What is all this nonsence costing?Who is paying for it(can guess thet one!).
If I was her I would walk away and maintain my dignity and not deal with these pocket stuffing Muppets.
Then,when there is the next election, she can stand against them with some credability.Certainly will have more than the Muppets we have now.”
by jimbob6163
Sunday, August 05 2012, 2:31PM
“You did not go to court llamalamb because you were not an over paid city council executive, even the lord mayors paid to much another job for the boys job.”
by llamalamb
Friday, August 03 2012, 12:41PM
“I have always worked hard and still ended up redundant. Didn't think of going to the high court though.”
by Pete303North
Friday, August 03 2012, 11:01AM
“Good riddance to bad rubbish”
by leicestergel
Friday, August 03 2012, 9:16AM
“...burtos.... you commenting on history or the pocket stuffers we now have ?”
by Burtos
Wednesday, August 01 2012, 10:52PM
“I know enough.
She'll be back for more money through the courts - mark my words.”
by Lynnetmurph
Wednesday, August 01 2012, 9:36PM
“You do not necessarily know. I did a good job, worked hard, and then got I'll.
My university decided to 'make me redundant', on the grounds that they did not need my skills.
They ended up taking three extra people on to do my job, and the job ads required less qualifications than I had.”
by Burtos
Wednesday, August 01 2012, 1:31PM
“This woman is a money grabbing disgrace. Absolutely useless and always on the sick. Her actions prove she never cared a jot for Leicester or it's people. Money money money. How did she get the job in the first place?”
by Markymark002
Wednesday, August 01 2012, 1:08PM
“@ le27ld
She didn't make any promises because she was always "ill" and never there.”
by 4_Stroke
Wednesday, August 01 2012, 12:47PM
“If you get paid £174,000 a year you don't expect employment rights. Its hire and fire at that level. looks like she is still trying to get some cash out of it though as its still going to a tribunal. Whats next, the ECHR?”