Amar Alwitry, a consultant ophthalmologist, had his job offer rescinded before he was due to start work at the Hospital in 2012. The SEB claimed the withdrawn offer related to a ‘breakdown’ in the relationship between Mr Alwitry and senior managers. However, Mr Alwitry has long maintained that his job offer was rescinded owing to concerns he had raised about patient safety as a result of staff timetables.
A 2016 report by the States Complaints Board into the termination of Mr Alwitry’s contract cited serious failures within the Hospital, criticised the SEB and said the treatment of the eye surgeon had been ‘appallingly shabby’. It also said that ‘urgent and effective steps’ should be taken to properly compensate Mr Alwitry, who had given up his NHS job in order to move to Jersey.
After becoming locked in years of legal proceedings with the SEB, Mr Alwitry won his case in February 2019 following a two-week trial in which the Royal Court found he had been unlawfully dismissed in breach of contract.
Speaking in the States yesterday, Chief Minister John Le Fondré revealed that the SEB had agreed to pay £2,369,000 to Mr Alwitry, who is a former Victoria College student, in an ‘out-of-court settlement’.
The Chief Minister noted that the SEB had ‘done its very best to limit the damages as much as possible’, and that the amount of the settlement was ‘substantially less than had been put into the public domain’.
He said: ‘This has been going on for some nine years. The matter was resolved by way of a confidential out-of-court settlement whereby the States Employment Board has agreed to pay Mr Alwitry £2,369,000, gross, in respect of his claimed losses as a result of the termination of his contract of employment – and neither party is entitled to comment further on the terms of the settlement.’
Senator Le Fondré added: ‘The net sum retained by Mr Alwitry after he has settled his tax and other liabilities remains confidential. Some matters related to costs remain outstanding and subject to further court determination, and neither party can comment on this.’
