View in browser
 
 
 
 
Update on We Have Won Whistleblowing Protection Back For Junior Doctors
 

Dear All,


I know I have disappointed many of my generous supporters by not giving a full account of why I withdrew my whistleblowing case under a fairly questionable settlement agreement.


The reason for this is that discussions surrounding the settlement agreement were protected by ‘Without Prejudice Privilege’.


Last month I was emailed by a Telegraph Journalist with evidence that the Trust and HEE were not only referring to the ‘Without Prejudice' discussions but also that they were not telling the truth about them.


These actions and the recent publication of the Telegraph and HSJ articles have enabled me to speak openly for the first time about the various threats made that led to the settlement agreement. Last Sunday's Telegraph piece can be read here.


The threats were as follows;


1. A six figure ordinary costs threat against me for the entire 21 day hearing if I cross examined any of the witnesses and lost the case. (Payable by me)


2. Reference to a wasted costs application against my lawyers (Payable by my lawyers)


3. Reference to a referral to the legal regulator for my lawyers.


4. Reference to a referral for me to the GMC.



These threats were made verbally to my barrister when I was under oath. They were not made in writing nor were they ever mentioned prior to the hearing. Astonishingly the other side have denied making such threats/references to journalists.



The Trust and HEE need to take responsibility for their methods in bringing this whistleblowing case to an end. I will be getting to the bottom of how the Trust and HEE feel able to deny to the media the threats they made to bring about the settlement and agreed statement. They have had 4 years to refer me and my lawyers to regulators yet they chose to mention this for the first time during my 6 days of evidence. 



The Trust has also implied in their statement that the findings of the NHS England Peer Review into the Intensive Care Unit in my case was not relevant to my safety disclosures or my employment tribunal proceedings. This is not true as my evidence at the hearing clearly showed. This Private Eye piece explores some of the safety issues in my case and shows that it is not true to say that my disclosures related only to two doctors not showing up for work on the medical wards during a night shift.



We are very grateful for the support you have given us and the case



Best wishes,



Dr Chris Day







 

 
 
 
Disclaimer: CrowdJustice sends out emails on behalf of Case Owners so that they can keep you updated about their case. The content of this email is drafted by them and CrowdJustice is not responsible for its contents.
 
We don't share your contact details with Case Owners, but if you want to get directly in touch with them, please reply to this email with the subject line Please forward to the Case Owner.

Our mailing address is: 14 Grays Inn Rd, London WC1X 8HN