KB-2023-003302 - [2025] EWHC 1628 (KB)
Fecha: 27-Jun-2025
The pleaded claim
The pleaded claim
The claim is for breach of contract. In the Particulars of Claim the Claimant seeks orders setting aside the decisions of the Adjudication Panel and the declarations that the Defendant did the following, in breach of an implied term of the contract:
acted unreasonably in concluding that the hug between the Claimant and Client A was sexually motivated.
acted unfairly and in breach of the rules of natural justice in failing to properly evaluate and attach sufficient weight to the evidence of Dr Wilkinson when determining sanction.
acted unreasonably in failing to properly evaluate and attach sufficient weight to the evidence of Dr Wilkinson when determining sanction.
acted unfairly and in breach of the rules of natural justice and/or unreasonably in rejecting Dr Wilkinson's evidence on the grounds that it was for the most part theoretical.
Imposed a sanction which was unreasonable and disproportionate in all the circumstances.
Made a decision to dismiss the appeal, which was unreasonable in all the circumstances set out above.
- Heading
- Rory Dunlop KC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge
- The contract
- Implied terms
- Factual Background
- The allegations and documentary evidence before the Adjudication Panel at the start of the hearing
- The hearing before the Adjudication Panel – Day 1 and fact-finding
- Day 2 – the findings on the allegations and the submissions on misconduct and impairment
- The Adjudication Panel decision on misconduct and impairment
- Day 3 and the decision on sanction
- The Appeal
- The pleaded claim
- Legal framework
- Submissions
- Discussion
- The first issue – the conclusion that the hug was sexually motivated
- The second issue – the treatment of the evidence as to insight, remediation and risk of repetition, including the evidence of Dr Wilkinson
- The third issue - sanction
- Conclusions