Cambridge Vice-Chancellor found liable for silencing whistleblower
The unanimous judgment, published yesterday, found that the Vice-Chancellor was responsible for “mishandling” Evans’s grievances. It also stated that Prentice oversaw “a pattern of complaints being ignored or dismissed without examination”. According to the tribunal, “there was a shared desire to close down whistleblowing complaints which might be damaging to Cambridge University and the Institute of Astronomy.” The University’s handling of the matter was described as “problematic and deeply unsatisfactory”, while the evidence Prentice presented during her cross-examination was also deemed “unsatisfactory”.
Evans, who last year ran to be the University’s chancellor on an anti-bullying platform, alleged that one female academic had been “hounded” out of her job, while others had been left “frightened” by “aggressive professors”. In a written submission to the tribunal, one of the female staff members concerned compared her treatment to “psychological torture”.
Yesterday’s judgment concluded that Evans “was subjected to detriments” for his efforts to highlight discrimination. It added that allegations against him by his department head Richard McMahon were “subjected to a prolonged nearly two-year investigation by the University” despite there being “no evidence to support them”. Evans sought separate legal proceedings against McMahon, with a 2023 issues judgment finding that the department head had defamed him. In defending the defamation claim, McMahon received funding from the University of Cambridge’s insurance policy.
