QLD Interference with employment relationship

[Bugs]

Hello,

A neighbour is using his corporate email address, logo and signature when sending emails in a body corporate dispute. He is relying on the technical expertise indicated by his position of employment. His emails include derogatory statements regarding the other parties in the dispute. I have been advised that if I alert his employer to this I could be “intentionally interfering with another person's employment relationship” and that as this could cause the other person to lose his job I could be held liable for any economic losses by that person.

I have tried to research the tort of interference with contractual relations or tortious interference but I am not a lawyer and unclear whether the interference would have to be “wrongful” or “unlawful” in the Queensland/Australian jurisdiction.

It seems strange that you could be open to litigation as it could prevent you making a complaint about anybody despite their seriously bad behaviour, for instance a bus driver who failed to pick up children.

With thanks for any advice

Bugs

 

[Rob Legat - SBPL]

That’s not what tortious interference is, otherwise no one would ever be able to complain about poor treatment or service. Tortious interference in contract is where you do something that prevents the person from being able to carry out a contractual obligation.

Here you’re merely pointing out what the person has done.

 

[Bugs]

Thank you Rob your prompt and helpful response is most appreciated.

 

[Scruff]

Be sneaky. You can always take a little different approach by informing the company "indirectly", which should be simple enough to do.

You have received emails from a company address which contain the company's name and logo, so...

1. Contact the company, explain that you have received emails from a company address and you are seeking to confirm that Mr. X is representing the company in this matter.
2. If the company doesn't know what you're talking about, then provide them with the appropriate context and explain how the emails are related to the matter - pointing out that in your opinion, the emails "imply" that Mr.X is acting on the company's behalf. If the company asks you to forward them copies of the emails, then simply say you'd be happy to do so and forward them off to the company.
3. Leave it in the company's hands to determine whether or not Mr. X has breached company policy (or even the terms of his employment) by using company email/name/logo for personal use.

End result? The company becomes aware of the conduct without you directly reporting it. You simply made enquiries that you had every right to make in the circumstances.

As an added bonus, you may receive a response from the company that explicitly denies that Mr. X is acting on their behalf in that particular matter. Producing that response at the next meeting or whatever will not be a very good look for Mr. X, as it would no doubt raise questions about his credibility.

 

[Bugs]

Be sneaky. You can always take a little different approach by informing the company "indirectly", which should be simple enough to do.

You have received emails from a company address which contain the company's name and logo, so...

1. Contact the company, explain that you have received emails from a company address and you are seeking to confirm that Mr. X is representing the company in this matter.
2. If the company doesn't know what you're talking about, then provide them with the appropriate context and explain how the emails are related to the matter - pointing out that in your opinion, the emails "imply" that Mr.X is acting on the company's behalf. If the company asks you to forward them copies of the emails, then simply say you'd be happy to do so and forward them off to the company.
3. Leave it in the company's hands to determine whether or not Mr. X has breached company policy (or even the terms of his employment) by using company email/name/logo for personal use.

End result? The company becomes aware of the conduct without you directly reporting it. You simply made enquiries that you had every right to make in the circumstances.

As an added bonus, you may receive a response from the company that explicitly denies that Mr. X is acting on their behalf in that particular matter. Producing that response at the next meeting or whatever will not be a very good look for Mr. X, as it would no doubt raise questions about his credibility.

Thank you Scruff that is a very useful suggestion of how to make an indirect approach. I greatly appreciate your time in describing this strategy in detail. Bugs

 

[Scruff]

No worries mate. Welcome to the forum.