Keegan v Newcastle United Football Co Ltd Essay

Keegan v Newcastle United Football Co Ltd - Essay Example 2million in addition to interest which will be assessed if the parties do not agree. In the United Kingdom, Constructive dismissal is covered under the Employment Rights Act 1996 (Prichard, 2005, p. 15) Facts Mr Keegan was appointed the Manager of the Club (for the second time) under a written Contract signed and dated 16 January 2008. The then Chairman of the Club, Chris Mort, had approached him about the position a few days earlier, and asked him to meet Mike Ashley (the owner) before deciding whether to take up the appointment. Therefore, a meeting was arranged to take place on 16 January 2008 in London; in attendance were Mr Keegan, Mike Ashley, Mr Mort and Tony Jimenez. After lengthy negotiations and discussions, the Contract was signed between Mr Keegan and the Newcastle United Football Club, and Mr Keegan was appointed the Manager of the Club at an initial salary of ?3million per annum. The primary case for Mr Keegan is under the contract’s terms. Before the signing of the contract, they had agreed that he was to have the final say, and this is the basis on which he signed the contract on. Also, he asserts that at this meeting, Messrs Ashley, Jimenez, and Mort has expressly assured him that he would have the final say. However, the Newcastle Club argues that nothing was expressly said at the meeting regarding whether Mr Keegan will have the final say. In the case, the Club argues that Mr Keegan was told that there was a possibility that Dennis Wise (who was the then Manager of Leeds), would be appointed to this post. As such, the Club argue that under this structure, Tony Jimenez and the Director of Football would be responsible for recruitment of players and they would have the final say, not Mr Keegan. There are several events that culminated to the resignation of Mr Keegan on 4 September 2008. On 30 August 2008, almost at the end of the transfer window Mr Keegan was telephoned by Mr Wise and was told that he had a great player for the Club to s ign, namely Ignacio Gonzalez, and therefore he should look him up. Mr Keegan tried to do a background search about the player and could not even locate him on the internet and so was not satisfied that he will make a good player. Notwithstanding the fact that Mr Keegan had made it clear to Mr Wise, Mr Jimenez and to Mr Ashley that he strongly objected to the signing of Mr Gonzalez, the Club went ahead with the deal and the transfer was concluded on 31 August 2008. The Club defended its move as being motivated by commercial interests of the Club. The Club described these commercial interests as: the signing of the player on loan would be seen as a â€Å"favour† to two South American agents who were influential and would look Club favourably in the future. Whereas it is clear that Mr Keegan had concerns concerning the nature of this deal, his primary objection to it was that it breached the term of his contract by which he, as the Manager, would have the final say. Mr Keegan st ated that despite several attempts by both sides to find a way forward, there seemed to be no headway and he thus concluded that he had no option but to leave the Club. Legally, Mr Keegan argued, the Club had breached