POL00025908
POL00025908
Confidential and privileged legal advice.
Do not disclose, forward, scan or copy
DRAFT Contingency Planning: Risk Assessment Table
This document summarises in Counsel's Opinion on the Common Issues. By its very nature, it is simplistic and should not be relied upon in lieu of a careful reading of
Counsel's Opinion.
Where we have offered a view on the impact on Post Office, this an initial view based on our current knowledge and we have not sought to set out an exhaustive list of
impacts. We also note that the Common Issues are not discrete topics and there will be interplay between them. Success or failure on some points may lead to
success or failure in other areas. Further, if multiple common issues are lost, they may have a compound effect greater than the risks identified below.
In preparing this risk assessment, we have not yet considered any mitigating actions that may be taken.
A significant adverse impact on the business that could threaten
its existence.
Post Office is very likely to lose the issue / The proposed term is
very likely to be implied
A major adverse impact on the business that will have a
Post Office is more likely to lose than win the issue / The
considerable long-term commercial harm.
proposed term is more likely than not to be implied.
A material impact on the business that will cause some
commercial detriment / increased costs
50/50
There will be some impact on the business but the additional
Post Office is more likely to win than lose the issue / The
burdens / costs will be manageable.
proposed term will likely not be implied.
Post Office is very likely to win the issue / It is very unlikely that There will be negligible impact on the business
the proposed term will be implied.
[PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT ]
09.07.2018
POL-0022387
POL00025908
POL00025908
Confidential and privileged legal advice.
Do not disclose, forward, scan or copy
th Relational Contract Summary: Counsel is satisfied overall that Post Office is likely to succeed on this issue.
Was the contractual relationship between Detail: There is some risk on this issue for Post Office due to:
Post Office and Subpostmasters a
A) This area of law being in a state of development;
B) The way each party is dependent on the close cooperation of the other, which puts a query
over how the Subpostmaster relationship operates in practice;
“relational contract"/
If so, this would mean that Post Office was
subject to duties of good faith, fair dealing,
transparency, co-operation, and trust and C) An imbalance of bargaining power and level of sophistication between Post Office and the
confidence? Subpostmasters; and
D) The SPMC and NTC having several characteristics of relational contracts, and the SPMC in
particular not being particularly well drafted.
If the court were to find that they were relational contracts, this doesn't necessarily mean that the
"good faith term" should be automatically implied. Counsel's view is that it would be wrong to
imply a term as to good faith into the SPMC and NTC.
However, there is a significant question mark over what good faith actually means. It could be
limited to whether Post Office acts honestly or the meaning could be taken further to mean
putting Subpostmaster's interests above Post Office's interests.
Impact:
. Post Office will be required to carry out more checking of its decision to make sure
they align with the "relational contract", and will need to ensure its process adheres
to that standard, which will require time and have a cost to it.
. Post Office may need to balance acting in own best interests against
Subpostmaster's interests. This would fetter Post Office's ability to run and evolve
the business in the way it sees fit
[PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT ]
09.07.2018
POL-0022387
POL00025908
POL00025908
Confidential and privileged legal advice.
Do not disclose, forward, scan or copy
2. Implied terms Summary: There is a high threshold for the Claimants to reach to be able to imply terms into the
Which, if any, of the 21 terms were implied contracts. There are some terms which are more risky than others.
terms (or incidents of such implied terms) of Detail: The Claimants are attempting to imply 21 terms into the contract. They are referenced
the contracts between Post Office and below grouped in themes rather than the 21 specific terms.
Subpostmasters? 7 sage : a
To dissuade the court that the 21 implied terms need incorporating into the contracts, Post
Office has admitted two implied terms, which in Counsel's opinion render the additional implied
terms unnecessary (the Stirling v Maitland Term and the Necessary Cooperation Term).
However, there are no guarantees about how the Managing Judge will address each and every
implied term.
As matters stand, there are some arguments on the implied terms which are finely balanced. For
example, the court may think it a small step to agree to a mutual duty to maintain trust and
confidence in a business to business, agency relationship.
If some of the implied terms are accepted, these may have a practical effect on requiring Post
Office to do things which are not currently required by the contracts.
Impact: See below which categorises the 21 implied terms into groups of similar terms and
then provides commentary on each grouping.
POST OFFICE IMPLIED TERMS
3. Implied term (admitted): Impact
Cooperation . These terms apply a low threshold (eg. necessary cooperation) to all Post Office's
Post Office and Subpostmasters would not activity in all areas that touch postmasters.
take steps which would stop the other from . We would expect Post Office to be meeting these standards in most areas but we
complying with the contract do not have a holistic view of Post Office's business to say this with certainty.
Post Office and Subpostmasters would
cooperate with the other as was necessary
to enable the other to carry out their
obligations as set out in the contract
[PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT ]
09.07.2018
POL-0022387
POL00025908
POL00025908
Confidential and privileged legal advice.
Do not disclose, forward, scan or copy
Exercise of powers 2
[All other terms of the contracts]
Post Office would exercise any power
(under the contracts or generally) honestly
and only for the purpose the power was.
created to achieve.
Post Office will not exercise a power
arbitrarily capriciously or irrationally.
CLAIMANTS IMPLIED TERMS
4. Implied term: Note: This issue has been split into two parts because it depends on which express terms are
Exercise of powers 4 being considered.
, 4 ae 4 Post Office has a high degree of freedom when deciding to (i) vary the Subpostmaster Contracts
Maree OW) aac veretons ane) and (ii) withhold Subpostmaster remuneration during suspension. Counsel has advised that the
arin ae Saeeah Court is likely to place some restrictions on these discretionary powers, namely that these
‘9 Ie e powers should not be used arbitrarily, capriciously or irrationally.
Post Office would exercise any power Impact
(under the contracts or generally) honestly Pi
and only for the purpose the power was. . Post Office will need to pro-actively consider and document in every case
created to achieve. whether remuneration should be withheld during a period of suspension. This
DOstOnicennilnctexercisctalnowen could lead to significant back-claims for withheld remuneration. Going forward this
Auatheniyceaate cn aoe could be remedy with a process change to approve and document these
Vel ¥ y decisions.
: It is considered unlikely that Post Office would vary the Subpostmaster Contracts
without careful consideration. More effort may be required to document these
decisions.
5. Implied term: Counsel is satisfied that Post Office's other powers under the Subpostmaster Contracts (eg.
power to terminate) are unlikely to be fettered by these implied terms.
Impact
If this implied term does apply to other powers under the contracts (eg. right to
terminate) this may slow down decisions and actions (eg. delay suspensions) and
therefore cause losses to increase in branches.
It would give Subpostmasters wide grounds on which to challenge many
decisions on Post Office.
Post Office would need to document decisions so to prove that they are not
arbitrary or irrational. It should be noted that the threshold for irrationality is very
high - a decision needs to be completely perverse for it to be classed as.
irrational. The greater risk is that the decision looks arbitrary or capricious
because Post Office is not able to point to any audit trail on its decision making.
[PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT ]
09.07.2018
POL-0022387
Confidential and privileged legal advice.
Do not disclose, forward, scan or copy
POL00025908
POL00025908
Communication of ability to alter branch
data
Post Office would not hide from
Subpostmasters its ability to:
A) alter data remotely;
6. Implied term: Impact
Quality of Horizon . If Horizon does this already, then this implied term will have minimal impact.
Post Office would provide a system which . If Horizon does not meet these standards, Post Office would need to liaise with
was reasonably well suited to its designated Fujitsu as to whether such changes to Horizon are achievable and if so, the cost of
purpose, including: implementing them.
A) error repellency . If changes to Horizon were made, Post Office may need (depending on those
5 changes) to roll out a training programme to Horizon users.
B) error prevention
er z " . Post Office would need to bear in mind the audience it was communicating to, as
C) error detection’ Identification Subpostmasters may not necessarily understand technical error reports. There
D) a way to report errors to the Horizon may need to be an additional team in place to interpret Horizon reports into a user
user friendly format.
The system should be able to deal with
errors both at the:
1) data entry level; and
2) system level.
The system should be able to carry out:
i) data processing,
ii) carrying out the relevant transaction; and
ili) reconciling transactions.
The system should also record any error
issues as listed in points A— D above.
th Implied term: Impact
This is probably a one off communication to Subpostmasters with some new
internal training for staff. There may be some minor changes to day to day
working of Post Office so to ensure that a consistent message is given about the
functionality of Horizon.
[PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT ]
09.07.2018
POL-0022387
Confidential and privileged legal advice.
Do not disclose, forward, scan or copy
POL00025908
POL00025908
or
B) alter transactions which fed into the
calculation of the branch accounts
Communication of problems in branches
Post Office would communicate and not
hide/ fail to tell Subpostmasters the extent
to which other Subpostmasters were
having:
i) issues relating to Horizon; and
ii) the generation of discrepancies and
shortfalls
8. Implied term: Impact
Communication of problems in Horizon . This would create an ongoing duty to inform Subpostmasters about problems in
Post Office would: Horizon. Potentially this would extend to any bug, no matter how small. These
. communications would be onerous to prepare, taking considerable time and effort.
A) communicate known problems, bugs or si "7 ' .
i alah, . jubpostmasters may have a reduced level of confidence in Horizon as a result of
errors in or generated by Horizon; regular updates about issues — this could lead them to "blame the system".
and . Post Office would need to take steps to understand the system more fully than it
B) not hide/ fail to tell Subpostmasters of has had to previously. This could require obtaining technical advice on a frequent
known problems, bugs or errors in or basis from Fujitsu, which would have a cost
generated by Horizon
which might have financial or other
implications for Subpostmasters
9. Implied term: Impact
The business would need to consider the structure, the frequency and level of detail of
the communication, all of which would require additional effort and cost.
Communication would have to be balanced against data protection and privacy issues.
Subpostmasters may have a reduced level of confidence in Horizon as a result of
regular updates about issues — this could lead them to "blame the system".
It could increase the amount of time the business requires to deal with complaints
about Horizon, discrepancies and shortfalls as more issues may be questioned.
[PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT ]
09.07.2018
POL-0022387
Confidential and privileged legal advice.
Do not disclose, forward, scan or copy
POL00025908
POL00025908
10. Implied term: Impact
Reasonable skill and care + We do not have a holistic view of Post Office's business to provide an exhaustive
Post Office would supply its support ean ete cial pars of ine business we have studied have generally operated
services to Subpostmasters (eg. back-office .
accounting, the Helpline, training, etc.) with + Any areas requiring improvement would incur costs of change.
ictesenele (© challlatns Tee, + At present, any failure to exercise reasonable skill and care is a commercial problems
only. If this term is implied, each failure is a breach of contract that could lead to
claims by Subpostmasters for any losses caused to them.
11. Implied term: Impact
Relationship . Post Office would need more safeguards in place to evidence that it was not
(1) Post Office would not take steps which taking steps which undermine the relationship
would undermine the relationship of trust . Post Office would have to balance acting in own best interests against
and confidence between it and the
Subpostmasters
(2) Post Office would take reasonable care
in:
A) performing its functions and/or.
B) exercising its functions within the
relationship
especially where the functions could affect
the:
1) accounts.
2) business
3) health and
4) reputation of the Subpostmasters
Subpostmaster's interests. This would fetter Post Office's ability to run and
evolve the business in the way it sees fit
[PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT ]
09.07.2018
POL-0022387
Confidential and privileged legal advice.
Do not disclose, forward, scan or copy
POL00025908
POL00025908
12.
Implied term:
Shortfalls
Post Office would:
A) produce, keep and maintain accurate
records of all transactions carried out using
Horizon;
B) be able to explain all relevant
transactions;
and
C) use the records to explain any shortfalls.
Post Office would co-operate in trying to:
A) identify the possible or likely causes of
any shortfalls without any input from the
Subpostmasters and/or
B) work out whether or not there was any
shortfall by carrying out a formal
investigation
C) prove as a result of the investigation that
the shortfall was properly attributed to the
Subpostmaster under the contract.
Post Office would not seek recovery of any
shortfalls from the Subpostmasters unless
and until:
A) it had complied with its duties (which
include the duties in the implied terms);
Impact
This would reverse the current responsibilities between Post Office and
Subpostmasters in relation to losses.
Post Office would need to put processes in place to enable it to explain all
transactions and shortfalls.
This would make recovery of losses in branches very difficult if not impossible in
many cases.
[PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT ]
09.07.2018
POL-0022387
Confidential and privileged legal advice.
Do not disclose, forward, scan or copy
POL00025908
POL00025908
B) it had shown that the shortfall was a
genuine loss to Post Office
Post Office would provide adequate training
and support.
Post Office would especially provide
adequate training and support where:
A) new working practices were introduced;
B) new systems were introduced; or
C) where Subpostmasters were required to
provide new services.
13. Implied term: Impact
Communication of information about + The business would need to consider the structure, the frequency and level of detail
shortfalls of the communication. This could be quite onerous given the size of the network.
Post Office would fully and honestly tell * Communication would have to be balanced against data protection and privacy
Subpostmasters in general about the issues.
jeeseteele aute3 ar Sites, + Subpostmasters may have a reduced level of confidence in Post Office as a result of
regular updates about issues.
+ It could increase the amount of time the business requires to deal with complaints
about Horizon, discrepancies and shortfalls as more issues would be questioned
14. Implied term: Impact
Training + — If Post Office already provides adequate training and support, this additional terms
will have minimal impact. It should be noted that the admitted term of "necessary
cooperation" will likely require Post Office to provide adequate training and support.
If more is required from Post Office, this could require more trainers and training
sessions, a greater amount of more detailed training material, consideration of the
form of training and a way to track whether the training provided had been properly
instilled into the audience aimed at.
The impact would be further increased if this training was also required for
Subpostmaster assistants.
Additional in-house training may be needed to ensure face to face contacts are giving
Subpostmasters consistent advice.
END OF IMPLIED TERMS
[PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT ]
09.07.2018
POL-0022387
Confidential and privileged legal advice.
Do not disclose, forward, scan or copy
POL00025908
POL00025908
Were any or all of the express terms in the
GPOC paragraphs listed below onerous
and unusual, so they would be deemed
unenforceable unless Post Office brought
them fairly and reasonably to the
Subpostmasters’ attention?
15. Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 Summary: The Claimants have failed to identify the relevant provisions in the contracts which
. 5 a ‘i show that the parties have agreed, in exchange for something else (such as a fee), to provide a
Did Post Office supply Horizon, the Helpline 7 i 7 :
and/or training/materials to Subpostmasters pe alpha ea ed benefit of the Subpostmaster. This therefore weakens the Claimant's
(i) as services under “relevant contracts for Pr Point:
the supply of services” and (ii) in the course Detail: Contracts will only fall within the Supply of Goods and Services Act if they involve one
of its business, such that there was an party selling a service to another party.
implied term requiring Post Office to carry = .
out any such services with reasonable care me hac question is whether Post Office had a contractual obligation to provide Horizon, the
and skill, pursuant to section 13 of the elpiing and Talhing jas "sevicss’.
Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982? The Claimants have not identified any specific contractual provision in which they say Post
Office assumed an obligation to provide a service. However, there is scope for an argument on
this point.
The key concern is with the NTC, in which there is a possible provision that the Claimants
could say means that Post Office had an obligation to provide the Helpline.
Impact
® This is what Post Office are arguably doing already. If Post Office was required to
act beyond its current practice, it would need to assess the impact of any decisions
regarding the "services" when making any changes to the provision of "services" or
the content of the services
. Post Office would face issues if it was under an obligation to provide the "services"
if there was an outage with Horizon, if access to the training/materials or the
Helpline was unavailable due to a glitch, as Post Office would be liable for making
sure Subpostmasters had access to these services.
16. Onerous, unusual or unfair terms Summary: It is likely any clause will be classed as "unfair" so long as Post Office has provided
the Subpostmaster with a copy of the contract before they entered into it.
It will be a more difficult argument if the Subpostmaster did not have chance to consider the
terms before signing.
If the terms are found to be "unusual or onerous", Post Office will need to show that it brought
these terms to the Subpostmaster's attention, if it wants to rely on those terms. Some
problematic terms include the right to suspend, to suspend without pay and to terminate on 3
months’ notice.
[PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT ]
09.07.2018
POL-0022387
Confidential and privileged legal advice.
Do not disclose, forward, scan or copy
POL00025908
POL00025908
Whether this is an issue for Post Office will mostly be on a fact specific basis for each
Subpostmaster, as generally the practice seemed to be that contracts were provided to
Subpostmaster before the agreements were entered into.
Impact
. If terms are "unusual or onerous", they would be unenforceable against
Subpostmaster. If this applied to business critical terms such as termination,
suspension and loss recovery then this would have a critical impact on the
relationship with Subpostmasters, albeit likely limited to those Subpostmasters who
never saw their full contract terms before becoming a Subpostmaster.
. Going forward, Post Office needs to improve its contract origination processes,
with clear evidence of Subpostmasters being given access to, and time to
understand, their contract terms.
17.
Liability for Losses
What is the proper construction of section 12,
clause 12 of the SPMC?
Clause 12 states "The Subpostmaster is
responsible for all losses caused through
his own negligence, carelessness or error,
and also for losses of all kinds caused by
his Assistants. Deficiencies due to such
losses must be made good without delay."
What is the proper construction of Part 2,
paragraph 4.1 of the NTC?
Para 4.1 states: "The Operator shall be fully
liable for any loss of or damage to, any Post
Office Cash and Stock (howsoever this
occurs and whether it occurs as a result of
any negligence by the Operator, its
Personnel or otherwise, or as a result of
any breach of the Agreement by the
Operator) except for losses arising from the
criminal act of a third party (other than
Summary: Post Office is likely to succeed on the major issues arising out of the construction of
these clauses.
See also the comments above in relation to implied terms regarding shortfalls.
NOTE: This is a high level summary. This area is highly nuanced and complex and needs
further significant work.
The major challenge on these clauses whether for a "loss" to be recoverable it needs to be a
real financial loss to Post Office or whether it can be an accounting loss in a postmasters
accounts. The difficulty with the former is that Post Office would need to track the loss ina
branch accounts and show how that loss caused it real financial detriment. This would require a
significant forensic accounting exercise, tracing a loss through all Post Office's back-office
accounting systems.
Impact
. Losing this point would make it very difficult for Post Office to recover losses without
significant effort and details investigation into every loss in every branch.
[PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT ]
09.07.2018
POL-0022387
POL00025908
POL00025908
Confidential and privileged legal advice.
Do not disclose, forward, scan or copy
Personnel) which the Operator could not . It also has the effect of shifting the burden of proof onto Post Office to show the root
have prevented or mitigated by following cause of the loss. In many cases, this will be impossible to discharge.
[(ROEES CES SN sy [ei CITA) . It may give rise to substantial claims for repayment of losses to Subpostmasters
taking reasonable care. Any deficiencies in
stocks of products and/or resulting shortfall
in the money payable to [Post Office] must
be made good by the Operator without
delay so that, in the case of any shortfall,
[Post Office] is paid the full amount when
due in accordance with the Manual."
dating back many years.
18.
Post Office as Agent
Post Office as agent
Was Post Office the agent of Subpostmasters
for the limited purposes at GPOC paragraphs
82 and 83?
If so, was Post Office required to comply any
or all of the obligations at GROC paragraph
84, which include that Post Office would:
a) properly and accurately to effect, execute,
record, and/or maintain and keep records of
all transactions which the Claimants initiated
using Horizon or for which the Claimants were
potentially responsible;
b) to render and make available to the
Claimant accounts (in accordance with
paragraph 84 (a); and/or
c) a where the Defendant alleged shortfalls
to be attributed to the Claimants, to comply
with the duties the Claimants have said they
are owed in relation to Horizon.
Summary: The contracts make it clear that Subpostmasters are agents of Post Office, not the
other way around.
Counsel considers that it will be a steep challenge for the Claimants to succeed on this Agency
issue, as it will be difficult for them to reserve the relationship so that the Post Office
subordinates its interests to the Subpostmasters' interests.
Impact
2 This would reverse the current responsibilities between Post Office and
Subpostmasters, making recovery of losses from Subpostmaster very difficult if not
impossible.
[PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT ]
09.07.2018
POL-0022387
POL00025908
POL00025908
Confidential and privileged legal advice.
Do not disclose, forward, scan or copy
19. I Subpostmaster as Agent Summary: Counsel's overall opinion is that Post Office is likely to win on this argument that
Subpostmasters owed duties to Post Office, that they were bound by their accounts and that if
Was the extent and effect of the agency of they made false accounts, they are also bound by them.
Subpostmasters to Post Office such that the
principles of agency applied as Post Office Detail: It is clear that Subpostmasters are agents of Post Office. There is more scope for
argues? argument about what agency duties apply to Subpostmasters. Post Office asserts that the
Did Subpostmasters, as agents, bear the following agency duties apply.
burden of proving that any Branch Trading (a) As its agents, Subpostmasters owed fiduciary duties to Post Office and a duty to account to
Statement account they signed and/or Post Office;
Hokies Uo Pest Olea ess Ines? (b) Where an agent renders an account to his or her principal, he is bound by that account
unless and to the extent that he discharges the burden of demonstrating that there are mistakes
in the account that he should be permitted to correct; and
(c) Where an agent deliberately renders a false account to his or her principal, in relation to the
matters covered by that account the court should make all presumptions of fact against that
Subpostmasters as are consistent with the other facts as proven or admitted.
Counsel does not consider that the Claimants arguments, even if they had any real substance,
could lead to the total exclusion of the principles Post Office relies on as listed above. It will be
more difficult to apply the general principles on a case specific circumstances where a
Subpostmaster has submitted an account which he/she has said is in dispute or has sought to
qualify his/her approval in any way.
It may be possible on a case by case basis for a Subpostmaster to show the accounts were not
inaccurate or that he/she was not responsible for the shortfall.
Impact
+ Losing this point would make recovery of losses more difficult as Post Office could no
+ Post Office would have to prove that Branch Trading Statements were correct before/
after they were signed off by a Subpostmaster which would limit Post Office's ability to
recover losses.
+ Anew process would need to be introduced for signing off the accounts where the
outcome of shortfalls have not been concluded.
[PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT ]
09.07.2018
POL-0022387
POL00025908
POL00025908
Confidential and privileged legal advice.
Do not disclose, forward, scan or copy
20. I Suspension Summary: There is a real risk that the court will find that there is an implied term that Post
Office would only suspend SMPR where there was a reasonable basis for suspension on one of
On a proper construction of the SPMC and more of the grounds listed in the express clauses.
NTC, in what circumstances and/or on what
basis was Post Office entitled to suspend Detail: The Claimants say these clauses act in a more limited way than the way Post Office has
pursuant to SPMC Section 19, clause 4 and historically applied them. They seek to limit the circumstances in which Post Office can suspend
Part 2, paragraph 15.1 NTC? Subpostmaster.
Note: the Claimants also seek an implied For the most part, Counsel thinks the Claimants arguments are weak. However, there is a risk
term in relation to Suspension. that the court could instead decide that although it will not imply a "reasonable basis" for the
suspension, it may instead treat the right to suspend as a discretion which cannot be exercised
[Feet ites elas eid Gane ENN: arbitrarily, irrationally or capriciously by Post Office.
A) without reasonable and proper cause;
Impact
and/or
B) when Post Office had breached its duties to . Rosaries could stl suspend but may need to take more care before exercising
the Subpostmasters. 9 pend.
. Ability to make quick decisions could be hindered
. Concern for Post Office's reputation if it is required to keep a questionable
postmasters in their position whilst investigations are carried out.
. Risk to assets whilst decisions made.
21. I Summary Termination Summary: Counsel considers it unlikely that the Claimants will be able to persuade the court to
apply the limitations they propose on Post Office's power to terminate, either by way of an
On a proper construction of the SPMC and implied term or as a matter of construction.
NTC, in what circumstances and/or on what
basis was Post Office entitled summarily to Detail: The Claimants are seeking to limit the circumstances in which Post Office can end their
terminate? agreement with a Subpostmaster without any notice or hearing i.e. relationship ends
Note: the Claimants also seek an implied Immediately on: Post Omnceis say 50.
term in relation to summary termination. Counsel does not think the Claimants are likely to persuade the court of their version of how
this power should, in their view, operate.
Post Office would not terminate contracts:
A) without reasonable and proper cause; Impact
and/or . Post Office could not terminate when it had committed even a trivial breach of
contract. This would allow many Subpostmasters to contest the validity of their
terminations.
[PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT ]
09.07.2018
POL-0022387
POL00025908
POL00025908
Confidential and privileged legal advice.
Do not disclose, forward, scan or copy
B) when Post Office had breached its duties to
the Subpostmasters.
22. I Termination on Notice Summary: On the face of it there is no legal reason why the 3 (SPMC) and 6 month (NTC)
notice periods should be construed any differently than as they are set out in the contract, as the
On a proper construction of the SPMC and words are plain and clear.
NTC, in what circumstances and/or on what
basis was Post Office entitled to terminate on Detail: Counsel does not consider that the court will read in a requirement, as requested by the
notice, without cause? Claimants, that Post Office must "conscientiously consider what period of notice to give".
However, Counsel is concerned with the 3 month notice period, as this is a very short notice
period for agreements of this kind. The Judge may have some sympathy with the Claimants on
this point and may seek to moderate the contract in some way on this point eg. by extending the
notice period.
Note: the Claimants also seek an implied
term in relation to termination on notice.
Post Office would not terminate contracts: Counsel is less concerned with the 6 month NTC notice period.
A) without reasonable and proper cause;
Impact
and/or
5 a 9 : Post Office could not terminate when it had committed even a trivial breach of
Peed Bost office had breached its duties to contract. This would allow many Subpostmasters to contest the validity of their
MESES terminations.
. The Claimant's proposed implied term would prevent Post Office from terminating
on notice unless a Subpostmaster was in breach of contract. This would limit Post
Office's ability to restructure its business by moving on agents who were no longer
financially viable or in line with future business requirements.
23. I Termination —- Minimum 12 Months' Notice Summary: This is the Claimant's alternative formulation for its arguments in relation to
termination rights. In essence, the Claimants are saying that the standard Subpostmaster
Contracts are a sham and should be ignored. Instead, Post Office should not be able to
terminate on less than 12 months' notice.
Do the express written terms of the SPMC and
NTC between Post Office and
Subpostmasters represent the true agreement
between the parties, as to termination (in this Counsel thinks Post Office will win this point. Counsel's view is that Post Office is likely to
regard, the Claimants rely on Autoclenz v succeed on the true agreement issue because:
°
(Bedi wilt] USete chy, a) the Autoclenz principle is of limited application as the dispute does not focus on employment
If not, was the “true agreement” between the status
parties as alleged at GPOC, para. 71?
[PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT ]
09.07.2018
POL-0022387
Confidential and privileged legal advice.
Do not disclose, forward, scan or copy
POL00025908
POL00025908
Paragraph 71 alleges that the “true
agreement’ was that termination had to be
on reasonable notice (which was never less
than 12 months).
b) the Subpostmaster contracts are "ordinary" or "commercial" agreements, made business to
business and so the Autoclenz principle shouldn't apply
c) the Claimants haven't stated any new express terms on termination;
d) there is no conduct to suggest that the "true agreement" is what the Claimants allege;
e) it is difficult to see how the Claimants can argue on the one hand that the termination
provisions do not represent the “true agreement", but the rest of the contract does.
Impact
. See comments above in relation to Summary Termination and Termination on
Notice.
24.
Assistants
Did SPMC section 15, clause 7.1; NTC, Part
2, clauses 2.3 and 2.5 and/or any of the
implied terms contended for by the parties
and found by the Court purport to confer a
benefit on Assistants for the purposes of
section 1 of the Contracts (Rights of Third
Parties) Act, and if so which of these terms
did so?
What was the responsibility of
Subpostmasters under the SPMC and the
NTC for the training of their Assistants?
Summary: There is some risk that assistants had directly enforceable rights against Post Office
in relation to training.
Post Office accepts that it was required to provide Subpostmaster with training materials which
allowed them to train their assistants, but its insists that assistants are trained by
Subpostmasters. It denies that it had any duty to train assistants or that assistants could directly
enforce such rights against Post Office.
Counsel's view is that Post Office is unlikely to be required to train assistants and that this duty
rests with the Subpostmaster.
Impact:
* — Significant additional costs would need to be incurred to train all assistants in the
network.
NOTE: Three issues (Compensation for loss of office x 2; Subsequent appointments) have been removed as from the latest Individual particulars of Claim
these issues no longer arise
[PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT ]
09.07.2018
POL-0022387