Historian Laurence Westgaph has challenged National Museums Liverpool (NML) in the wake of a news article which reported a series of allegations against him. Mr Westgaph appeared before the Court of Appeal's administrative court earlier this month to challenge decisions made by NML after an article by local online newsletter The Post was published on February 8 this year.
Public Court of Appeal documents detail the allegations, denied by Mr Westgaph, which included that Mr Westgaph was appointed to a position with NML despite the museums body being aware he had "previous historic spent convictions for two serious offences". The article also alleged Mr Westgaph was "a perpetrator of sexual and domestic violence".
The article further included allegations that NML had "ignored warnings of inappropriate behaviour" by Mr Westgaph against female colleagues while working with the museums and it had only belatedly launched an internal investigation into the allegations.
Judge Stephen Davies, sitting in the high court, said the "truth or falsity" of the allegations were not relevant to the case and their relevance was they were the catalyst for NML taking actions against Mr Westgaph.
Mr Westgaph has denied all of the allegations against him and told The Post he was "committed to fully co-operating with the police with any enquiries they have". The Post is an online newsletter and website which is not connected to or affiliated with our former sister newspaper the Liverpool Daily Post.
Mr Westgaph is a prominent local historian and public speaker who specialises in the history of slavery and black Britain. NML, which operates seven museums across Liverpool including the International Slavery Museum, said it had contracted Mr Westgaph as a freelance historian-in-residence between August 2020 and June 2024.
Following the publication of the article, NML issued a public statement which said "whilst aware of the spent convictions, it had not been made aware of the other allegations [and] being very concerned by these allegations, it had 'opened an internal investigation'."
Mr Westgaph told the Court of Appeal that the statement "must have been understood as NML opening an internal investigation into the allegations against him". NML issued a further statement four days later and said the internal investigation would be conducted by an external body.
The following day NML told Mr Westgaph that he was suspended from any voluntary activities at NML whilst the investigation took place. Mr Westgaph was also banned from entering any of NML's sites or contacting its employees. The email also stated "this does not imply that any decision has been made about the allegations against you".
Although NML did not make a formal statement about the suspension, it soon became public knowledge, the Court of Appeal heard. Mr Westgaph claimed the cumulative impact of NML's actions had been severe, resulting in "reputational damage, professional exclusion, academic loss and continuing uncertainty".
The court heard Mr Westgaph asked for details of the allegations and he was advised by solicitors acting for NML that the investigation was in relation to the criticisms of NML and not his conduct. NML told the court it had not received any such complaints.
On July 11 NML wrote to Mr Westgaph and said following the conclusion of the review he was free to attend public areas of NML properties. However, it added: "In light of the recent communications between you and NML, the trustees are of the view that there has been a complete breakdown in our relationship.
"It is apparent that you have lost trust in NML as reflected in the repeated accusations which you have made. We recognise that legal proceedings are ongoing. The trustees have provisionally concluded that it would not be appropriate for them to permit your resumed voluntary participation in stakeholder groups until they feel there is a possibility of a trusting and effective relationship between parties."
NML said if Mr Westgaph would resume participation in stakeholder groups then it would first undertake a risk assessment relevant to safeguarding and staff welfare.
Mr Westgaph identified eight challenged decisions including illegality in relation to the investigation and suspension; procedural unfairness; multiple breaches of the European Convention on Human Rights including a claim for financial compensation; and breach of the public sector equality duty.
NML argued the challenges should be refused for reasons including the claim was brought too late; that no investigation relating to Mr Westgaph's conduct was opened; and there was no basis for saying the suspension was irrational given the allegations.
Judge Davies refused Mr Westgaph's application to extend time for service to the claim, which means he cannot proceed further with the claim. The judge said even if he had extended the time he would have refused the claim "on the basis the claims made are not reasonably arguable".
The judge said one of the reasons for refusing the application to extend time to serve the claim was because Mr Westgaph, who represented himself, was "unable or unwilling to limit his case to a limited number of clearly expressed grounds of challenge to a limited number of decisions".
Judge Davies urged the parties to consider alternative dispute resolution, adding ~"now these proceedings have come to an end it is clear that parties, acting sensibly and reasonably, ought to be able to have a discussion about whether, and if so how, any part of the existing relationship can be restored".
A statement on the NML Website, last updated on September 18, said the investigation by independent third party, brap, "concluded National Museums Liverpool acted in line with its policies in the appointment of its historian in residence and identified ways it could strengthen its internal policies and procedures".