Zinda v Ark Schools (Practice and Procedure : Compromise)

�The Employer agrees not directly or indirectly to publish or otherwise make any statement in respect of you which is intended to or might reasonably be expected to damage your reputation or be detrimental to or otherwise critical of you�

is not void because the employer intends to and does report the dismissal of an employee, a teacher, for gross misconduct to the Independent Safeguarding Authority as required by the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 , section 6.

The Appellant was employed by the Respondent as a Teacher and Subject Leader for Technology at Burlington Danes Academy from 1 September 2007.� He was suspended pending investigation and disciplinary proceedings on 19 March 2008, the principal allegation being that he submitted two false claims for expenses.� He was dismissed summarily for gross misconduct on 8 July 2008.�

The Appellant commenced two sets of proceedings in the Employment Tribunal.� In 3301727/2008, lodged before his dismissal, he claimed direct discrimination, victimisation, and unlawful deduction from wages.� In 330510/2009, lodged some months after his dismissal, he repeated earlier claims, added a claim that the dismissal and the appeal process were acts of discrimination and also added a claim for wrongful dismissal.�

In February 2009 the Appellant, who for this purpose was being assisted by his trade union, the National Union of Teachers, entered into a Compromise Agreement with the Respondent.� The terms of the Compromise Agreement, so far as is material, provided: