Chester 01244 405555

Grosvenor Court
Foregate Street Chester
Cheshire CH1 1HG
DX: 19990 Chester

Shrewsbury 01743 443 043

Lakeside House
Oxon Business Park
Shrewsbury SY3 5HJ
DX: 148563 Shrewsbury 14

Manchester 0844 800 8346

Pall Mall Court
61-67 King Street
Manchester M2 4PD

Send us a message
Our Offices

Court of Appeal rules that Whistleblowing Partner is not protected

3rd January, 2013

A ‘worker’ who acts as a ‘whistleblower’ – disclosing breaches of the law – receives statutory protection under the law if he or she suffers detrimental treatment as a result of having made the protected disclosure to the appropriate authorities.

In the recent case of Clyde and Co LLP v Bates Van Winkelhof, a partner in a law firm acted as a whistleblower, accusing a fellow partner of engaging in criminal activity including money laundering and bribery.

She claimed to have suffered a detriment and sought to rely on the legislation protecting workers, claiming that her disclosures were ‘protected disclosures’.  However, the Court of Appeal rejected her argument, concluding that for such disclosures to be protected by the legislation, there had to be ‘a hierarchical relationship whereby the worker is to some extent subordinate to the employer’.  This could not apply to an equity partner.  The facts of the case are complex as it involved a Tanzanian joint venture, but the principals are clear.

The Court found that the whistleblowing legislation does not protect equity partners.  This puts someone who becomes aware of criminal misdeeds on the part of their fellow partners in a difficult position, particularly as partners can be jointly and severally liable for losses to the partnership that result from the activities of their fellow partners.

The case does not look at the LLP Members’ Agreement in place at the time.  The right for the LLP to expel members without reason (so long as it is not discriminatory) is usually included.  There may have been other routes open to the whistleblower to challenge the offending behaviour; we do not know.  The LLP Agreement should create a duty of good faith for all members and also a duty to comply with legislation, in this case anti-bribery rules.

If you find yourself in such a position, contact Mark Briegal on 01244 405563 or at [email protected] for advice on what steps to take.

 

 

 

 

You might also be interested in...

Solicitors’ Professional Indemnity Insurance: Run-off and alternative regulators

18th July, 2018

Special Focus: Solicitors’ Professional Indemnity Insurance Run-off – it dominates the thoughts of sole practitioners and partners in smaller law firms in my experience and restricts the ambitions of firms. The SRA could help law firms by relaxing their rules on run-off cover on their Solicitors’ Professional Indemnity Insurance to help firms merge or close more easily. This would protect... Read More »

Senior employment lawyer joins Theatr Clwyd board

17th July, 2018

Helen Watson, Head of Employment Law at Aaron & Partners LLP, has taken up an invitation to become a Trustee of both the Trust Board and the Main Board Theatr Clwyd has bolstered its senior leadership team with the appointment of an experienced employment law solicitor to support its vision of being at the forefront of theatre making... Read More »

Why there is more to CSR than just boosting a company’s ego

6th July, 2018

When a business invests in its community it deserves praise – but it must go beyond that, writes Helen Watson, a trustee at Claire House and partner at Aaron and Partners Solicitors. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is the link between a company and the community in which it operates. As a trustee on charity boards including Claire House... Read More »

Contact Us