Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Employment lawEmployment contracts

Is there a price to pay for suing costly employees

by Jill Kelly 19 Oct 2004
by Jill Kelly 19 Oct 2004

Can companies get back at staff who cost them money by suing them for breach of contract? IT company Coleman Bennett evidently thinks it can.

According to press reports, it is suing a former worker, Terence Hunter, for £250,000. He allegedly had an affair with a colleague, but company procedure required personal staff relationships to be reported in writing, and the relationship distracted him from his work duties.

There are three main issues that usually put employers off suing their staff:



  • the employee may not have the money to meet any claim
  • it hardly sets the right tone for good staff relations; and
  • it can be pretty difficult to prove the exact level of financial loss suffered as a direct result of the employee’s breach of contract.

Most employers settle for proper management structures to catch under-performing staff before the damage is too great, and dismissal to put an end to the problem. However, there have been some successful claims against employees.

In Lister v Romford Ice and Cold Storage Co, the company recovered from an employee the damages it had to pay out to a third party because of the employee’s negligent driving. And the Dean of Westminster successfully recovered fixing fees and surpluses on events that the organist and master of choristers had been retaining for himself.

Employers who want to put themselves in the best position to sue their staff should, as with many aspects of the employment relationship, start with the contract of employment. Useful clauses spell out that the employee must use all reasonable skill and care, and devote all of their time and attention to the company’s business during their hours of work.

A number of employers provide in the contract that if the employee does not give the right period of notice, the employer can deduct a sum equal to the salary for the number of days’ shortfall from the employee’s final payment.

In Giraud (UK) v Smith, the Employment Appeals Tribunal found that this kind of clause is unenforceable because it is a penalty, rather than a genuine pre-estimate of the loss that will be suffered by the company. It was significant that the company reserved the right to recover more from the employee than the contractual penalty, if required.

Usually, employers will not be able to do anything about an employee who leaves on short notice, because any damages they do suffer will be more than covered by the saving in the employee’s salary. If the employer had to get a replacement in at greater cost, or could not find a replacement, there would be more hope of a successful claim. Actor Robert Reed had to pay Anglia TV damages when he failed to play the lead part in a film, and the TV company could not get a substitute.

Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance

Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday

OptOut
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Employers at the wrong end of a tribunal claim often try to counter-claim against the employee for breach of contract. But they cannot do so unless the employee has first brought a claim for breach of contract. And think carefully before claiming against staff who have raised issues of unlawful discrimination or whistleblowing – it could provoke a claim of victimisation.

Key points



  • Careful contract drafting will put companies in a better position to bring claims against staff
  • The company will have to prove the exact level of monetary loss it has suffered to recover damages
  • Claims against staff are no substitute for good management of their activities while employed

Jill Kelly

previous post
Leaked report confirms dangers of second-hand smoke
next post
Justifying HR’s existence

You may also like

Employers’ duty of care: keeping workers safe in...

27 Jun 2025

When will the Employment Rights Bill become law?

26 Jun 2025

Employee ownership rockets in past decade

25 Jun 2025

Seven ways to prepare now for the Employment...

20 Jun 2025

The employer strikes back: the rise of ‘quiet...

13 Jun 2025

Lawyers warn over impact of Employment Rights Bill...

13 Jun 2025

Racism claims have tripled and ‘Equality Act is...

12 Jun 2025

Court rejects Liberty’s legal challenge against EHRC consultation

9 Jun 2025

US Supreme Court lowers burden of proof for...

6 Jun 2025

Institute of Directors demand reforms to Employment Rights...

6 Jun 2025

  • Empowering working parents and productivity during the summer holidays SPONSORED | Businesses play a...Read more
  • AI is here. Your workforce should be ready. SPONSORED | From content creation...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2025

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2025 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+