The link is to a Daily Mail story that has a privacy order as part of an Employment Tribunal.
A celebrity chef won a privacy order yesterday granting him anonymity over claims he mistreated two employees whom he later sacked at his business empire.
The ruling means that he cannot be named at an employment tribunal later this year brought by the female and male members of his staff.
I will be looking for the judgment for this. Superficially this looks wrong.
A celebrity chef won a privacy order yesterday granting him anonymity over claims he mistreated two employees whom he later sacked at his business empire.
The ruling means that he cannot be named at an employment tribunal later this year brought by the female and male members of his staff.
I will be looking for the judgment for this. Superficially this looks wrong.
Comments
Once again: a privacy order is used to hide unethical behaviour to paint a good image.
Mainstream Media still seem to think that gagging orders are ok. They don't realise that they are used not only to cover unethical behaviour such as unfair dismissal or an affair outside marriage but also CRIMINAL activities by public authorities!