Ms C Moore v Inspire Partnership Multi-Academy Trust — 2021

Ms Moore was an experienced assistant head teacher at Half Acres Primary School. After poor summer 2019 SATS results and a period of change following the Trust’s intervention, the tribunal found that the school was in an Ofsted window and that the Trust and its senior staff were genuinely trying to improve standards. The tribunal accepted that Ms Moore felt undermined, criticised and undervalued, but found that her perception of the events was not objectively correct.

The tribunal rejected the main allegations of undermining and unfair criticism. It found that Ms Moore was not deliberately excluded from the phonics observation on 16 October 2019, that the governors’ meeting comments about missing documents were not personal criticism of her, and that the request for a written role description was reasonable in the context of leadership change and unclear delegation. It also found that the concerns raised about the “comfy, cosy” comment and Ms Moore’s behaviour were handled as informal issues, not as performance management or disciplinary action.

The tribunal accepted the Trust’s evidence about the wrap meetings and the external review on 21 November 2019. It found that the review feedback, including comments that the reviewer was “shocked” and that aspects of provision were “ineffective”, was directed at the organisation of teaching rather than at Ms Moore personally, and that the large meeting format was a common practice under the new framework. The meeting on 22 November 2019 was found to have been an informal discussion about Ms Moore’s behaviour at the previous day’s meeting, not a “character assassination”.

Applying section 95(1)(c) ERA 1996 and the implied term of trust and confidence, together with the objective approach to constructive dismissal, the tribunal concluded that the Trust had reasonable and proper cause for the actions it took and that nothing it did, alone or cumulatively, was calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage the employment relationship. It also found that Ms Moore had applied for another job before the final meeting, that she later resigned to take the Waterton post, and that she had not raised a grievance while employed. The claim of unfair dismissal was therefore dismissed and no remedy arose.