A FORMER finance chief has lost her claim for constructive dismissal against Bournemouth council in a case that cost the taxpayer £250,000.

Liz Wilkinson, who earned £103,850 a year in her role as the borough’s executive director for finance, took the authority to an employment tribunal alleging she had been forced to resign for acting as a “whistleblower”.

Mrs Wilkinson was suspended in October 2014, with the council saying this was because a complaint had been received from senior officers about her “behaviour and conduct”.

She subsequently resigned, claiming she had been “unfairly constructively dismissed” and subjected to detriment for having made protected disclosures about the authority’s outsourcing deal with Mouchel.

This prompted an employment tribunal, heard in September, in which Mrs Wilkinson made a string of accusations against the council. These were rejected by Bournemouth council’s barrister who said her claims were a ruse to cover up allegations of bullying against her.

On Tuesday the tribunal found in favour of the council.

Chief executive Tony Williams said the affair had cost Bournemouth taxpayers £250,000.

“Given the nature of the allegations made by Mrs Wilkinson and that damages awarded in whistleblowing cases are uncapped, we are satisfied that thoroughly and robustly defending this claim was the right thing to do,” he said.

“The tribunal has found in favour of Bournemouth Borough Council in relation to all elements of this claim. Whilst we need time to fully digest the tribunal's judgment, we are of course pleased with the decision.

“To be clear, this ruling means that Mrs Wilkinson did not make any protected disclosures and was not constructively dismissed by the council. The evidence of council staff has been found to be credible and compelling.

“On this point, I must pay sincere and grateful tribute to all those staff who gave witness statements to the tribunal and, in particular, those who gave evidence on the witness stand. The stress suffered by our staff and, for some, the requirement to participate in a protracted and avoidable legal process, should not be under-estimated. It is testament to the strength of character of those individuals that they agreed to give evidence.

“Finally, I must reiterate that this ruling has found no case to answer from the council on all counts. We always had confidence that was the case and are pleased with the judgement received.”

The Daily Echo approached Mrs Wilkinson’s representatives following the ruling for comment, but no reply had been received at the time of going to press.