{"id":108714,"date":"2021-01-18T13:18:18","date_gmt":"2021-01-18T13:18:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/precoinnews.com\/?p=108714"},"modified":"2021-01-18T13:18:18","modified_gmt":"2021-01-18T13:18:18","slug":"academic-loses-claim-man-who-spurned-her-had-a-role-in-her-redundancy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/precoinnews.com\/world-news\/academic-loses-claim-man-who-spurned-her-had-a-role-in-her-redundancy\/","title":{"rendered":"Academic loses claim man who spurned her had a role in her redundancy"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/p>\n
Ruxandra Anghel and Dr David Westley (pictured) dated briefly but called it off because he wanted to reconcile with his wife<\/p>\n
An academic who\u00a0pursued a senior colleague for a romantic relationship then blamed him when she lost her job has lost her tribunal claim.<\/span><\/p>\n Psychologist Ruxandra Anghel and Dr David Westley dated briefly but called it off because he wanted to reconcile with his wife, a tribunal heard.<\/p>\n But despite him telling her several times that they could only have a professional relationship, she continued trying to persuade him to give her a chance, the panel heard.<\/p>\n On one evening she texted him, saying: ‘I’m coming over at yours later. Get a nice bottle of wine. There will be no talking.’<\/p>\n When he asked her if she was being serious, she replied: ‘I don’t make such jokes. It is not my style. I’m a grown woman. I expressed my desire. I was hoping for a more elegant response.’<\/p>\n Ms Anghel was left ‘heartbroken’ by Dr Westley, the employment tribunal was told.<\/p>\n And when she was made redundant from her role at London’s Middlesex University, she made a complaint against him, suggesting he had been instrumental in her departure.<\/p>\n An employment tribunal has now dismissed her claims that Dr Westley – now the head of the university’s psychology department – had tried to develop a ‘work with benefits’ relationship with her.<\/p>\n And it ruled he had played no part in her losing her job.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n An employment tribunal has now dismissed her claims that Dr Westley – now the head of the London’s Middlesex University’s (pictured) psychology department – had tried to develop a ‘work with benefits’ relationship with her. And it ruled he had played no part in her losing her job\u00a0<\/p>\n The hearing in Watford was told that Ms Anghel had been employed by the university’s Department of Psychology as a graduate academic assistant in 2014 after achieving a first class degree in the subject.<\/p>\n As part of that role she found herself working with Dr Westley – who had taught her as an undergraduate – on a scheme to help support students’ well being.<\/p>\n In March 2015, following a social occasion with colleagues, they went for a drink on their own and kissed, the tribunal heard.<\/p>\n Although the hearing was told Ms Anghel was open to a romantic relationship, Dr Westley told her a week later he had only just separated from his wife and was not certain the marriage was over.<\/p>\n But in April the couple started ‘dating’ and on one occasion went back to her home, where he cut short an intimate encounter, the panel heard.<\/p>\n ‘They ended up lying on top of the bed together,’ the tribunal heard. ‘(Ms Anghel) unbuttoned Dr Westley’s shirt, but he did not remove it. (She) removed her dress.<\/p>\n ‘Shortly after (her) dress was removed, Dr Westley decided that he did not want to go any further and he decided to go home, which is what he did.<\/p>\n ‘Their intimacy went no further, either on this night, or on any later occasion.’<\/p>\n The panel – headed by employment judge Patrick Quill – was told that in July 2015, the couple agreed not to carry on with their relationship. However, that October Ms Anghel emailed him, asking him to reconsider.<\/p>\n ‘My wish for myself right now is to settle down and start a family,’ she wrote. ‘Of course, the only way to have that is by starting a relationship.<\/p>\n ‘There are a few gentlemen who are interested in having that with me, but giving the friendship and feelings I built for you in the past four years, in my heart I was hoping that it would be you.’<\/p>\n Dr Westley replied to say that even if his marriage was not salvageable he did not feel he would be able to commit to a serious relationship for ‘quite a while’.<\/p>\n ‘I’m sorry if I had implied anything else was the case – l have tried to explain this in the past but perhaps I hadn’t been as clear as I thought,’ he wrote.<\/p>\n Ms Anghel and Dr Westley continued to work together and in 2016 she was promoted to a more senior role.<\/p>\n In June 2017 – a month after he told her he regretted that their only communication was now professional – she texted him the ‘there will be no talking’ message.<\/p>\n And in November following an argument over a reference he had written her she told him she was considering leaving the university because he had ‘broken her heart’.<\/p>\n That month she sent him a ‘closure’ email.<\/p>\n ‘In the email, (she) sought to suggest that she was pulling away from Dr Westley and that he believed that he would be upset,’ the tribunal judgement said.<\/p>\n ‘However, our finding is that it was Dr Westley who had made clear that he did not wish to have a romantic or sexual relationship and it was (she) who was upset by that stance.<\/p>\n ‘In the email, (she) referred to having various fabulous memories of Dr Westley and stated she had enjoyed their first kiss.<\/p>\n ‘She mentioned a more recent occasion on which they had had juice and a cigarette, and he had waited with her at the bus stop. She said that that had been beautiful.’<\/p>\n The following year Ms Anghel’s contract at the university was not renewed as part of a cost-cutting exercise.<\/p>\n She launched a formal grievance, claiming that Dr Westley’s behaviour had been inappropriate and accusing him of harassing her.<\/p>\n However, the university dismissed the allegations along with any suggestion he had been involved in her losing her job.<\/p>\n And the tribunal agreed, finding her claims of sex discrimination and unfair dismissal to be unwarranted.<\/p>\n It ruled that the romantic contact the couple had in 2015 was consensual and that afterwards Dr Westley had never sought to rekindle the relationship, despite her claims to the contrary.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n