Gibb v Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust [2010] EWCA Civ 678
Court of Appeal, Civil Division, Laws, Sedley and Rimer LJJ, 23 June 2010
For the purposes of unjust enrichment, if everything else is equal there is no principled distinction between a benefit consisting in money paid and a benefit consisting in a claim foregone.
Antony White QC and Oliver Segal (instructed by Thompsons Solicitors) for the claimant. Jane McNeill QC and Michael Ford (instructed by Brachers LLP) for the trust.
The claimant was appointed chief executive of the defendant NHS trust in November 2003. In 2006 the trust attracted substantial negative publicity due to the outbreak of a “super bug” at hospitals it managed. The healthcare commission investigated the outbreaks. Its final report in late 2007 was highly critical of the trust’s leadership. The trust decided to terminate the claimant’s employment, although her own conduct had not been impugned, in response to the adverse publicity. The parties agreed on a severance payment of £250,000. In the event, however, the trust only paid £75,000,
