Appeal By Paul Donnelly Against South Lanarkshire Council
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judge | Sheriff Principal A Y Anwar |
| Neutral Citation | [2021] SAC (Civ) 30 |
| Docket Number | HAM-A256-19 |
| Date | 07 September 2021 |
| Court | Sheriff Appeal Court |
| Published date | 12 October 2021 |
SHERIFF APPEAL COURT
[2021] SAC (Civ) 30
HAM-A256-19
Sheriff Principal A Y Anwar
OPINION OF THE COURT
delivered by SHERIFF PRINCIPAL A Y ANWAR
in appeal by
PAUL DONNELLY
Pursuer and Appellant
against
SOUTH LAN ARKSHIRE COUNCIL
Defender and Respondent
Pursuer/Appellant: Mr Hutcheson; Hutchesons solicitors
Defender/Respondent: Ms Lunny; South Lanarkshire Council
7 September 2021
Introduction
[1] The appellant is employed with in the respondent’s Social Work Resources Team.
The respondent has received two separate complaints from two members of its staff. One
complaint, made on 7 August 2018 relates to the appellant’s alleged conduct at a meeting on
the same date; the second complaint, made on 10 September 2018, relates to the appellant’s
alleged conduct at a meeting on 6 September 2018 (“the complaints”).
[2] The appellant seeks interdict to prevent th e respondent from proceeding with its
disciplinary procedures in relation to the complaints.
2
[3] On 9 July 2019 the sheriff refused interdict ad interim. On 9 December 2020 the sheriff
refused a second motion for interdict ad interim. Th e appellant appeals each of these
decisions.
Background
[4] It is necessary to set out the background in some detail. This being an appeal in
relation to an application for interim interdict, the facts have not been established; the
background to this matter is gleaned from the parties’ pleadings and submissions and from
the voluminous productions lodged and referred to.
[5] On 7 August 2018, the respondent received a complaint in relation to the appellant’s
conduct, from an employee, MM. On 10 September 2018, the respondent received a furth er
complaint regarding the appellant’s conduct from another employee, KB. The complaints
were referred to th e respondent’s Head of Children and Justice Services (Mr P) as the
Nominated Manager in terms of the respondent’s Disciplinary Procedures for Local
Government Employees and Craft Operatives dated September 2011 (“th e Disciplinary
Procedures”). The Nominated Manager is tasked with deciding whether a complaint should
be progressed furth er under the Disciplinary Procedures. The respondent avers that as a
consequence of the Nominated Manager and MM’s periods of ann ual leave, and as MM had
not decided wheth er she wished the complaint resolved informally or formally, no decision
was made in relation to how to proceed until around the time KB submitted her complaint.
Mr P then decided that the complaints be dealt with informally.
[6] On 20 September 2018, a meeting took place between the appellant and the
respondent’s East Kilbride Locality Manager (Dr A) to allow the complaints to be dealt with
To continue reading
Request your trial