BBC- Joey barton

[Del]

This would never ever go anywhere near an Employment Tribunal his legal advisers would not recommend it. Also if sacked you cant claim constructive dismissal his claim in tort would be breach of contract. And on that last point I am afraid the club had an unassailable case in its defence. The fact that he has accepted the punishment against him would tend to suggest it, you can be sure his legal advisors told him to take the hit because to not do so would allow the club to tear up the contract and save far greater sums of money. His conduct of bringing the club into disrepute, of lying about what other players said and breach of trust and mutual confidence would fall under the general heading of gross misconduct. Any employer if the charges are proven and by his own admissions they were, would be within their legal rights to proceed to termination of contract without compensation.

Your point contradicts itself....

You suggest the club would be within their rights to rip up his contract, and effectively that they'd want to to avoid further expense, but the fact they didn't suggests anything but this being the case. It's quite evident by recent events he has no future, further supporting the fact they couldn't do this.

Although you may deem it Gross misconduct, players contracts are watertight in their favour and bar shooting the boss, there's very little that will allow a club to sack a player. There were reports recently of a club trying to sack a player that beat up another player at training and it was thrown out..!

As a result of this, to sack him wouild effectively be classed as a means to an end and deemed by his defence as constructive dismissal and they'd demand full payment of contract, hence it never happened.

[The Leveller]

Noted in the spirit given.

[TBLOCKRANGER]

This would never ever go anywhere near an Employment Tribunal his legal advisers would not recommend it. Also if sacked you cant claim constructive dismissal his claim in tort would be breach of contract. And on that last point I am afraid the club had an unassailable case in its defence. The fact that he has accepted the punishment against him would tend to suggest it, you can be sure his legal advisors told him to take the hit because to not do so would allow the club to tear up the contract and save far greater sums of money. His conduct of bringing the club into disrepute, of lying about what other players said and breach of trust and mutual confidence would fall under the general heading of
gross misconduct. Any employer if the charges are proven and by his own admissions they were, would be within their legal rights to proceed to termination of contract without compensation.

A claim in tort cannot be a breach of contract. Claims in tort and breach of contract are separate remedies. Basic GCSE law.

[The Leveller]

It does not, the club for whatever reason although within its rights to tear up the contract as other clubs have done to players where there is justifiable cause, they did not. I do not know why they did not, this would have done to a County Court if he fought it and that would have involved no lowly junior barrister but a full chambers up to and including a QC. As to why they did not dismiss that is free for speculation, cost, bad publicity who knows and anyone's opinion on this is as good as the next person.

Gross misconduct allows any employer to terminate footballers contract or not, I would suggest that how a club treats a player depends on who that player is and at what level of football they play out. A case of one rule for PL and another for FL.

Constructive dismissal is when an employee resigns because they feel that they placed in such a position that is the only alternative. It has nothing to do with an employer sacking someone. As I said before if he had been sacked his claim in law providing his team thought he had a case would be for breach of contract. He was charged by the club, he accepted those charges and they could have led to dismissal. If he was so squeaky clean why did he accept the charges and why did the club decide not to dismiss. As I said that is for speculation. On that all views are equal. No doubt it will come out in a book in years to come providing he and the club have not signed a compromise agreement at some point.

[kron-1664]

the blokes a loon, sooner hes off the marseille or wherever the better, hwe has been nothing but an embarrassment since he joined us .

[The Leveller]

Partly correct we are both right and I am trying to do this in short hand but you would accept that this also covers emotional or reputational injuries. That would be in addition to any breach of contract.

[kron-1664]

It does not, the club for whatever reason although within its rights to tear up the contract as other clubs have done to players where there is justifiable cause, they did not. I do not know why they did not, this would have done to a County Court if he fought it and that would have involved no lowly junior barrister but a full chambers up to and including a QC. As to why they did not dismiss that is free for speculation, cost, bad publicity who knows and anyone's opinion on this is as good as the next person.

Gross misconduct allows any employer to terminate footballers contract or not, I would suggest that how a club treats a player depends on who that player is and at what level of football they play out. A case of one rule for PL and another for FL.

Constructive dismissal is when an employee resigns because they feel that they placed in such a position that is the only alternative. It has nothing to do with an employer sacking someone. As I said before if he had been sacked his claim in law providing his team thought he had a case would be for breach of contract. He was charged by the club, he accepted those charges and they could have led to dismissal. If he was so squeaky clean why did he accept the charges and why did the club decide not to dismiss. As I said that is for speculation. On that all views are equal. No doubt it will come out in a book in years to come providing he and the club have not signed a compromise agreement at some point.

All that flannel above, what will happen in all legal cases like this, both sides will be represented and use as many legal nuances, clauses to try and slightly tip a decision in their favour whilst charging big bucks to their client. Bottom line they may as well toss a coin and decide who is in the wrong/right. Only winner all the time is the lawer

[TBLOCKRANGER]

Partly correct we are both right and I am trying to do this in short hand but you would accept that this also covers emotional or reputational injuries. That would be in addition to any breach of contract.

I defer to you

[theblackmafia.]

I was lost at "this will never...."!