This month we had a glimpse into the world of high stakes gambling and a reminder of the risks an employer can face when giving a reference.
In Playboy Club London Limited v Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro SPA, an Italian bank gave a reference to the Playboy Club casino in Mayfair. The reference was in respect of one of the bank’s customers and assured the casino that he was “trustworthy up to the extent of £1.6 million in any one week”. On the strength of this statement, the casino allowed the customer credit of over £1 million.
It turned out that the customer had never held any money with the bank and the reference had been sent by a bank employee who was not authorised to give them.
The court found that the bank was negligent for providing an inaccurate reference. It did not matter that the bank employee did not have authority: the casino was entitled to rely on her apparent authority and she was acting in the course of her employment so the bank was liable.
Disputes over employment references are fairly common. Typically an individual hands in their notice, eager to start a new job, but then finds that the job offer has been withdrawn because their references aren’t satisfactory. They cannot withdraw their resignation (unless their employer agrees) and they no longer have a new job lined up. With the prospect of no income on the horizon, the individual will be assessing their losses and considering the merits of a claim against the business that provided the reference.
Here are five pointers to bear in mind when it comes to references:
If you would like to discuss these issues or you would like help introducing a reference policy, please contact one of the employment team on 020 7234 0200 or email employment@waterfront.law
The Workers (Predictable Terms and Conditions) Act 2023, creates a statutory right for qualifying workers to request a more predictable pattern of work. This right works similarly in a few ways to the right to request a more flexible working pattern.
In the news this week has been the speculation over Manchester United’s decision in respect of their player, Mason Greenwood. Greenwood was charged with rape and assault, but the charges – which he denies – were dropped back in February. We learnt yesterday that Greenwood’s time with the…
The Employment Relations (Flexible Working) Bill has now completed its journey through parliament and the Employment Relations (Flexible Working) Act 2023 is currently awaiting Royal Assent. What is changing?
Fans of Radio 4’s The Archers will be aware that Brian has sacked Stella as the manager of Home Farm. The background is that Stella spent £150,000 on a new seed drill without Brian’s approval so he has decided to treat the matter as gross misconduct and dismiss her with immediate effect. Stella has taken advice and has been told that she has a good claim of unfair dismissal and possibly sex discrimination too (apparently on the basis that so few farm managers are women). Leaving aside for one moment the fact that The Archers is a work of fiction, does Stella have a claim?