Southampton to fight £3.4 million payout ruling for ex-professor

University launches ‘urgent investigation’ into why it was not represented at tribunal

June 14, 2019
Pile of British currency notes (pounds)

The University of Southampton is to fight an employment tribunal ruling that it should pay compensation of £3.4 million to a former professor.

Richard Werner was awarded the sum at a hearing in Southampton which was conducted without representation from the university.

Professor Werner was professor of international banking at Southampton until July last year. He claimed that he was harassed and discriminated against for being German and a Christian.

Judge Mark Emerton found his claims to be “well-founded” and that Southampton had “failed to comply with the applicable [Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service] code of practice”.

Professor Werner’s claims were for wrongful and unfair dismissal, failure to pay holiday pay, direct and indirect religion or belief discrimination, direct and indirect race discrimination, as well as harassment relating to religion or belief and race and victimisation.

He told the BBC: “Unfortunately, presently I am not at liberty to discuss any particulars concerning the case, however that position may change over the coming days.”

A Southampton spokesman said the university had “ordered an urgent investigation by its independent auditors into why it was not able to present its evidence at the tribunal”.

“The university categorically rejects the claims made by Mr Werner and is commencing legal proceedings to get the judgment overturned,” the spokesman said.

The compensation figure includes unpaid holiday pay, future loss of earnings and loss of external earning opportunities. The university’s absence from the hearing was a key factor behind the unusually large sum being awarded.

The term “quantitative easing” is attributed to Professor Werner, whose book Princes of Yen was a number one bestseller in Japan.

登录 或者 注册 以便阅读全文。




  • 获得编辑推荐文章
  • 率先获得泰晤士高等教育世界大学排名相关的新闻
  • 获得职位推荐、筛选工作和保存工作搜索结果
  • 参与读者讨论和公布评论



Log in or register to post comments


Recent controversy over the future directions of both Stanford and Melbourne university presses have raised questions about the role of in-house publishing arms in a world of commercialisation, impact agendas, alternative facts – and ever-diminishing monograph sales. Anna McKie reports

3 October