Veteran NHS whistleblower campaigner, Dr Chris Day, has written a damning letter to Lord Fairley, President of the Employment Appeal Tribunal, accusing the system of “Institutional Corruption” in the way it has handled his case.
Dr Day, who has just lost an appeal case heard by employment appeal judge Sheldon, compared the way both the employment appeal court and the previous employment tribunal handled the proceedings to the verdict in the infamous Daniel Morgan murder case which has never been solved after a trial of suspects collapsed.
The way this murder was handled by the Metropolitan police led the independent panel to rule: ““Concealing or denying failings, for the sake of an organisation’s public image, is dishonesty on the part of the organisation for reputational benefit. In the Panel’s view, this constitutes a form of institutional corruption.”
Dr Day has emerged bloodied but not unbowed from a judgment that rejected all the detriments he claimed and was surprisingly unconcerned about the defendants Lewisham and Greenwich Health Trust’s chief executive lying on oath about a board meeting and its deputy communications office, Mr Cocke, destroying 90,000 emails that could have been useful to his case during the hearing. The worst the judgment could say was this was ” troubling.” Given this centred on his whistleblowing about the avoidable deaths of two patients in Woolwich hospital’s intensive care unit, which the trust has always tried to deny, this is a remarkably tame comment.
What was particularly hurtful to Dr Day is that at the appeal hearing he was accused in open court of lying about cost threats. He had been clear that he was forced at one stage to try to settle his case because he was told by his barrister that he would face a proposed application from the NHS for £500,000. See my report on his wife’s evidence here.
Effectively he was being called a liar by saying this had happened. Instead there is copious evidence that it did happen.
As he says in his letter: “At my most recent hearing, Mr Justice Sheldon explicitly stated in front of public observers that I was “lying” about being threatened for costs. He did this in circumstances when he knew my belief in cost threats was robustly grounded on written material from by former barrister Chris Milsom. He also knew that this material was enough to convince 2 MPs, the Telegraph and Financial Times that I had been threatened for costs. Accusing me of lying about cost threats in these circumstances was nothing more than a cheap smear to make me look like a liar in public.”
Or as he wrote earlier: “Dishonest or deluded whistleblowers don’t tend to have the support of former health ministers, senior doctors and the BMA to fund a KC.”
Also there is ample evidence in reports by lawyers that attempts to put costs on whistleblowers are commonplace. Indeed some lawyers moan they can’t get enough of them.
His complaint about ” institutional corruption ” is not directed at individual judges but at the legal system where lawyers socialise with each other and don’t want to see a colleague’s reputation or career damaged by having to admit they got it wrong.
As he says in his letter: “My complaint is not directed solely at individual judges but at the institutional handling of this matter. The EAT has placed judges in an impossible position: adjudicating on issues that, if determined on the evidence, would have serious implications for people with whom they admit to having ongoing professional or social relationships including being connected on social media.
“This is precisely the type of reputational self-protection identified as “institutional corruption” in the
Daniel Morgan inquiry. I am not expecting you or the EAT to do anything about this but want to record
my position and the fact that it has been put to you as EAT president. You will note 2 MPs have called
for a public inquiry into this case.”
The full letter is on the internet here. His account of the case on Linked In is on https://lnkd.in/dZuKkTFG.
My view from covering a number of tribunals- both involving whistleblower doctors, nurses and in the world of industry and the arts – is that lawyers are getting too cosy and comfortable with each other. Add to this the loss of media interest in all but the most lurid of court cases, there are precious few journalists left to observe what is happening in the courts.
All this is to the detriment of the ordinary member of the public when they fight their case. Arraigned against them is a club that knows how to fix the outcome. And this is destroying the principle of open justice and why we need radical reform of both the employment tribunal and county court system.
Make a one-time donation
Make a monthly donation
Make a yearly donation
Choose an amount
Or enter a custom amount
Your contribution is appreciated.
Your contribution is appreciated.
Your contribution is appreciated.
DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearlyPay via Paypal. Use link below.
Westminster Confidential 
I don’t know Dr Day’s full story – in all likelihood he is a hero whistle blower who in time honoured fashion has been appallingly done by – but at some point he quite simply has to give up. You can’t beat the system. Dr Day has my respect.
LikeLike
David Ward replies to you: “It’s always preferable to know the “full story” (need that be stated?) before commenting on a complex case like this. Failure to do so is both misleading and insulting to Dr Chris Day not to mention “amateur”. As for your advice to “quite simply… give up” much would not have been achieved in this world if your advice had been followed.
LikeLike
Forgive me my glib, thoughtless, and uninformed comment. No more need be said.
LikeLike
Unfortunately, the kind of corruption that Dr Day experienced is not confined to employment tribunals but the whole legal system in general. The legal system is merely the final layer in the theatre of the absurd which is all based around protecting professional reputations and covering up. In my own case, in attacking the truth HHJ Nigel Godsmark made 2+2=5. He closed his eyes to the damming evidence against the NHS and wrote a rambling judgement that read more as a PR exercise. In doing so, he not only denied me justice but he leaves all patients at risk because lessons aren’t learnt. Above all, he reinforces corruption in the system as lawyers know they can act in nefarious and deceitful ways and get away with it. Solicitor Melanie Isherwood of Weightmans was rewarded with the renewal of her firm’s multi million pound contract with the government to defend the NHS against legitimate clinical negligence claims by any means possible; she should be in prison. Its open corruption here in grubby UK:
https://patientcomplaintdhcftdotcom.wordpress.com/
LikeLike
Trial of suspects in the Daniel Morgan murder? You mean some suspects. Jonathan Rees and the Vian brothers were fitted up. Police did not follow up the prime suspect, ex P.C Fintan Creaven “Z31” as it was an embarrasment.
LikeLike
I’m not sure it is just lawyers in this cosy club. I’m sure senior NHS staff and, previously senior BMA doctors, went to the same dinner parties too. London has always had a generic ‘cosy’ club for senior professionals working for the NHS (among other public services).
LikeLike
Unfortunately, another example of how corrupt UK public life has become. Having watched the first EAT hearing it was obvious, to all but the intellectually challenged, its outcome not based on evidence nor correct evidence procedural integrity. That a second hearing and judgement choose to ignore this leaves little doubt the finding, against the interest of Dr. Chris Day, based on preserving professional and organisational interest.
LikeLike
Despite my ending my reply to David Ward “No more need be said”, I have something more to say, this time it is considered. I don’t know Dr Day but it appears that he was (and is) a conscientious doctor who shouted out when others remained silent about concerns for patient safety at his hospital in Woolwich. That was 2013/2014 and still there isn’t a settlement in this year of 2025, Dr Day continues to fight. This is the part I will try and word carefully. I am no spring chicken, I have experienced life and the employment world and am now retired thank God. It is par for the course for managers to exercise their power in a way and manner that protects themselves, it is not normal for managers to dispense justice – a manager once said to me, “I make the rules and if the rules go against me, I change the rules”. Chris Day is not fighting institutions and laws/regulations, he is fighting human nature. Even if he were to achieve some kind of victory and institutions were forced to change their rules and regulations, human nature would remain in place. And managers, judges etc will find ways to subvert any new laws and regulations to protect themselves and their authority.
Chris Day has a wife and two small children(?), he is a remarkable man and I wish him the best. I would like to see a point reached when he can rebuild his life and out of this cesspit. I can’t get my head around how he has managed over these ten plus years, it blows my mind.
LikeLike
I will add something more. I have taken an interest in the Lucy Letby case, it is highly likely – some would say beyond highly likely – that Lucy Letby is entirely innocent and that there were no murders at The Countess of Chester Hospital. Fourteen world class experts have come to that conclusion, that there were no murders at CoCH. They put down the tragic baby deaths to sub optimal care and or infections. Yet Lucy Letby still languishes in Durham Jail. One day Lucy Letby will be exonerated and set free, her well being and life destroyed beyond repair.
There is a parallel with Chris Day though LL’s situation and victimisation is far worse than Chris Day’s. Both are victims of the system, “You can’t fight City Hall” meaning authority holds all the cards and will play them – Lucy Letby didn’t even raise her head above the parapet like Chris Day, she was targeted. We live in a thoroughly corrupt world and brave souls who try to uncorrupt it have my undying admiration.
Note for David Hencke: You have spent a working lifetime exposing wrong doing and corruption and in retirement you continue to do so. Keep up the good and thankless work. There needs to be voices against the tsunami.
LikeLike
David Ward replied:<Thank you for your gracious reply to my post which was perhaps somewhat overhasty. I humbly apologise for any offence. I agree with all you say. We are without doubt on the same page and fighting for the same causes. I also agree with you about Lucy Letby. I think she is innocent and her seemingly errant reaction to her accusers can attributed to the immense stress she has been subjected to. Like you I hope she will exonerated.
Perhaps I can get to talk to you in person one day.
David Hencke adds: Thanks for your comment. I shall indeed try to keep this up
LikeLike
Reply to David Ward – Written words can easily be misunderstood, no need for an apology.
LikeLike