Priti Patel reaches six-figure settlement with ex-Home Office chief Philip Rutnam

Shame it didn't go to a public tribunal hearing.
thats were the buy off comes in - last thing they or many employers want is it all laid out in the open - transparency is soon bought off.

and should you not reach an agreement before the court case starts the legal eagles will be pushing to tell the hearing judge just exactly how much money has been turned down and that under those circumstances the case should be kicked out - makes the appellant look unreasonable.
 
thats were the buy off comes in - last thing they or many employers want is it all laid out in the open - transparency is soon bought off.

and should you not reach an agreement before the court case starts the legal eagles will be pushing to tell the hearing judge just exactly how much money has been turned down and that under those circumstances the case should be kicked out - makes the appellant look unreasonable.
They may try that in court, it doesn't work though. Any decent judge will allow the claimant their day in court, regardless of how much money was offered. You may not be awarded as much by a court, but the fact you turned down a 6 figure sum should not influence the court one way or the other. The right to justice is for us all.

The offer was accepted because it was more than the court would have offered, it really is as simple as that.
 
A six figure sum is of course anything between £100,000 and £999,999.
Bearing in mind he was earning over £150000 a year its unlikely he settled for 8 months pay.
Plus she, or in fact we, will have paid his legal fees and hers.
Plus as it says in the report proceedings are continuing, so more money to come yet.

Where does this become a breach of the ministerial code?
 
They may try that in court, it doesn't work though. Any decent judge will allow the claimant their day in court, regardless of how much money was offered. You may not be awarded as much by a court, but the fact you turned down a 6 figure sum should not influence the court one way or the other. The right to justice is for us all.

The offer was accepted because it was more than the court would have offered, it really is as simple as that.
As someone who works in this area, I completely agree with this
 
She carries some weight....... I guess she could be quite intimidating.
She doesn't strike me as being sharpest.... I suspect her bullying ways will be linked to trying to cover up her halfwittery.
 
Shame it hasn't come out of her pocket, seems that you can bully whoever you want in the workplace, with zero personal repercussions
 
£340,000 plus legal costs to keep the bully in a job
Whitehall sources said Sir Philip Rutnam, the former permanent secretary in the Home Office, received a £340,000 settlement with a further £30,000 of costs. He had threatened to take the home secretary to an employment tribunal hearing in September.

He also claimed he had been hounded out of his job for defending his staff, and was suing the government under whistleblowing laws.

The payoff means Patel and Boris Johnson will no longer face the possibility of giving evidence before a public tribunal.

It will, however, lead to demands to explain how much has been spent defending the home secretary.
 
A six figure sum is of course anything between £100,000 and £999,999.
Bearing in mind he was earning over £150000 a year its unlikely he settled for 8 months pay.
Plus she, or in fact we, will have paid his legal fees and hers.
Plus as it says in the report proceedings are continuing, so more money to come yet.

Where does this become a breach of the ministerial code?
I mean, all you have to do is click on the link in the OP to know the figure.

How is she still in the job?
 
Back
Top