WITN10370130
WITN10370130
From: Swil, Jonathan
Sent: 11 March 2014
To: David Oliver!”
Ce: Chris Aujard } J; Belinda Crowe
i GRO . § Band, Christa
Subject: RE: Following discussions at Post Office
David
We have considered your question below.
We agree that insofar as a SPMR's claim is for loss suffered as a result of the wrongful termination of his contract, the
maximum damages he could claim are likely limited to the pay to which he would otherwise have been entitled during
the three month notice period.
Section 1, clause 10 of the contract entitles Post Office to determine the contract on giving a SPMR three months’
notice. It also entitles termination for breach of a condition of the contract or non-performance of obligations or
services under it. Accordingly, it does not matter for what reason the SPMR’ $ contract is terminated, provided three
months’ notice is given. If no or less than three months’ notice is given, then Post Office would need to establish th
the SPMR had breached a condition or not performed an obligation or services. If Post Office cannot do that, then it
will be in breach to the extent of the insufficient notice and the losses flowing from that breach would likely only be the
pay lost during the or the remainder of the notice period. In some cases, such damages may well be less than three
months pay because of the general duty to mitigate loss (i.e. in this case, to find a new source of income) and/or any
savings of costs that would otherwise ordinarily be incurred by the SPMR in his Post Office business if his contract
had not been terminated prematurely.
The claims in respect of other categories of alleged liability and loss e.g., wrongful “ loss recovery” by Post Office, ar
a separate matter.
Kind regards
Jonathan
From: David Oliver.:[mailto:
Sent: 11 March 2014 12:33
To: Swil, Jonathan
Cc: Chris Aujard; Band, Christa; Belinda Crowe
Subject: RE: Following discussions at Post Office
Jonathan,
Thanks. Following up our conversation:
e Yes on the structure please stick to our revised structure.
e On timing Chris would like a review meeting on Monday and then a draft on Wednesday.
© On Second Sight as discussed please focus on any legal risk and forward looking not an analysis of how we
engaged them.
Separately grateful for an urgent answer to the question — is there anything you have seen to call into question Bond
Dickinson’s advice that Post Office’s liability with respect to a SPMR who has been summarily dismissed is framed by
the contractual notice period? Please let us know asap if you have a different view. In other words are the claims
for consequential loss completely out of court?
Regards
david
WITN10370130
WITN10370130
David Oliver
Programme Manager
jal Complaint and Mediation Scheme
Ce: Chris Aujard; Band, Christa; Belinda Crowe
Subject: RE: Following discussions at Post Office
David
Thanks for this. I’ m generally free to discuss anytime tomorrow morning after 9.30am. Let me know what time suits
you
Kind regards
Jonathan
From: David Oliver;[mailto:
Sent: 10 March 2014 18:35
To: Swil, Jonathan
Ce: Chris Aujard; Band, Christa; Belinda Crowe
Subject: Following discussions at Post Office
Jonathan,
Thanks for the paper. We have cut down further and reshaped to fit house style. Can we discuss tomorrow
morning once you have had a chance to review?
Thanks
David
David Oliver
Programme Manager
Initial Complaint and Mediation Scheme
This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressee only. If you are not the named
recipient, you must not use, disclose, reproduce, copy or distribute the contents of this communication. If you have
received this in error, please contact the sender by reply email and then delete this email from your system. Any
views or opinions expressed within this email are solely those of the sender, unless otherwise specifically stated.
POST OFFICE LIMITED is registered in England and Wales no 2154540. Registered Office: 148 OLD STREET,
LONDON EC1V 9HQ.
Any business communication, sent by or on behalf of Linklaters LLP or one of its affiliated firms or other
entities (together "Linklaters"), is confidential and may be privileged or otherwise protected. If you receive
2
WITN10370130
WITN10370130
it in error please inform us and then delete it from your system. You should not copy it or disclose its
contents to anyone. Messages sent to and from Linklaters may be monitored to ensure compliance with
internal policies and to protect our business. Emails are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to be error free.
Anyone who communicates with us by email is taken to accept these risks. Linklaters LLP is a limited
liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number 0C326345. It is a law firm
authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (www.sra.org.uk). The term partner in
relation to Linklaters LLP is used to refer to a member of Linklaters LLP or an employee or consultant of
Linklaters LLP or any of its affiliated firms or entities with equivalent standing and qualifications. Please
refer to www.linklaters.com/regulation for important information on our regulatory position. A list of
Linklaters LLP members together with a list of those non-members who are designated as partners and their
professional qualifications, may be inspected at our registered office, One Silk Street, London EC2Y 8HQ
and such persons are either solicitors, registered foreign lawyers or European lawyers
This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressee only. If you are not the named
recipient, you must not use, disclose, reproduce, copy or distribute the contents of this communication. If you have
received this in error, please contact the sender by reply email and then delete this email from your system. Any
views or opinions expressed within this email are solely those of the sender, unless otherwise specifically stated.
POST OFFICE LIMITED is registered in England and Wales no 2154540. Registered Office: 148 OLD STREET,
LONDON EC1V 9HQ.