This week an explosive employment tribunal has seen claims and accusations levelled at some of Liverpool City Council's current and former most prominent figures.
Nick Kavanagh was the director of regeneration at the city council but was dramatically arrested at the Cunard Building by Merseyside Police as part of the force's Operation Aloft in December 2019. He was subsequently suspended from his chief officer job and was eventually dismissed in March 2021 following a council disciplinary hearing.
Mr Kavanagh this week brought an unfair dismissal claim against the city council at Liverpool Civil and Family Court. He claims the council's chief executive, Tony Reeves, went out of his way to construct a case against him to remove him from his job. Mr Reeves and other council witnesses have insisted that all proper procedures were followed.
READ MORE: Joe Anderson backs former council boss in explosive unfair dismissal case
The dramatic hearing saw former city mayor Joe Anderson called as a witness to support Mr Kavanagh. Mr Anderson was involved in some sparky exchanges with city council lawyer Tim Kenward, who accused him of trying to derail a council disciplinary investigation into the former regeneration chief. Mr Anderson insist he only wanted to ensure a fair process.
Amongst all the evidence and witness statements heard at the hearing, one meeting about one particularly controversial city development project was spoken of time and time again. Much of the discussion and the cases put forward from both sides concerns the disputed details of what happened at a meeting over the hugely controversial New Chinatown plans several years ago.
Background to New Chinatown
The saga of New Chinatown is one of the most controversial in the city's recent history and is held up as an example of the problems Liverpool has found itself in when it comes to the development sector. The first scheme, promoted by Liverpool businessman Peter McInnes, received a blaze of publicity in 2015. The £200m project by the Chinatown Development Company ( CDC) envisaged new shops, homes and offices off Great George Street and was expected to revive the city's historic Chinatown community.
However, the scheme began to stall the following year after the ECHO reported on a complicated hearing at Preston Crown Court. Parent company North Point Global then entered into a legal dispute with Liverpool City Council and work at the site ground to a halt. Later the Serious Fraud Office would launch an investigation into suspected fraud at CDC and sister company North Point (Pall Mall) Ltd. Last October it was announced the investigation had been discontinued because of a lack of evidence.
In March, the ECHO reported the latest company planning to redevelop the land - the Great George Street Project Limited - had entered into administration following a High Court Hearing.
Crucial meeting
In this week's employment tribunal, there was a lot of focus on how it came to be that Liverpool City Council opted for North Point Global, part of construction firm PHD1 to develop the site and a meeting that took place where that decision was made. The accounts of what took place in that meeting, heard by the hearing this week, contained some critical differences.
In his witness statement, city council chief executive Tony Reeves says it was contact from the boss of the previous owner of the New Chinatown Site, Urban Splash, that first raised concerns about then council regeneration boss Nick Kavanagh. Mr Reeves said: "In late 2018 I was contacted by Jonathan Falkingham, the founder and creative director of Urban Splash in respect of concerns about the New Chinatown development and how Nick Kavanagh had dealt with the transfer of Urban Splash's interests to PHD1.
"Joe Anderson had also held discussions with Mr Falkingham and we agreed that an independent review would take place. Weightmans were instructed to carry out the review. Final report sent to the city solicitor June 2019.
"The report said that Nick Kavanagh had made a comment after the presentations to the effect that if Urban Splash transferred its interests to a developer called X1 then planning permission would not have been granted, which was a major factor in putting pressure on Urban Splash. The report had a recommendation that 'Liverpool Council considers whether investigations should be carried out in respect of the conduct of any individual officers.'
Mr Reeves said the contents of that report were of 'great concern'. He added: "It was clear that the recommendation of carrying out an investigation into the conduct of any individual officer required consideration in respect of Nick Kavanagh and his conduct. It became apparent that Merseyside Police were now also conducting their own investigation into the conduct of the claimant and other parties."
Disputed claims
But in his statement defending Nick Kavanagh, Joe Anderson paints a different story of that meeting, insisting the concerns were about the conduct of former Deputy Mayor Ann O'Byrne. Recalling his evidence to that original council investigation, he said: "I was interviewed by Simon Goacher (of Weightmans) on Chinatown, I said that I understood the contract had been put out to the market with the agreement of Urban Splash and the matter was dealt with by Ann O'Byrne, Nick Kavanagh and Mark Kitts (former assistant director at the council).
"I repeated that Ann O'Byrne came to see me to tell me that a scheme had been chosen which provided more retail and regeneration. I reminded her that although she was a cabinet member, there was a cabinet in place to do these things. I stated at the time that I probably would have agreed but only in response to her stating it was the scheme she wanted.
He added: "Jonathan Falkingham of Urban Splash said he had concerns about the successful candidate of PHD1/North Point Global and that Ann O'Byrne had hugged their representative Peter McInnes when he made their presentation. She did not stay for the other submissions. At no time do I believe that Nick Kavanagh acted improperly in what was a peripheral role to Ann O'Byrne."
Mr Anderson was repeatedly questioned about this statement when giving evidence on Thursday. He said he had been to visit Mr Falkingham at his home and insisted he never raised any concerns about the conduct of Mr Kavanagh. But council lawyer Mr Kenward accused the former mayor of trying to put his 'own spin on things to suit his own purposes. He said: "The issue was the role of members and officers in the process that resulted in PHD1 being chosen. You are unable to explain the concerns about the roles of both members and officers in that process."
Mr Kenward said it was 'not credible' for Mr Anderson to suggest Mr Falkingham had no issue with Mr Kavanagh as he was actually the source of the complaint against him regarding the New Chinatown situation. Responding, Mr Anderson said: "I think it is very naïve to suggest my credibility is at stake. I am saying what I recall truthfully."
In his own witness statement, Mr Kavanagh claimed Mr Reeves had lied about the complaint from Mr Falkingham in order to try and have him removed from his job. He said: "When questioned Mr Reeves stated on record that he had received a complaint from Jonathan Falkingham of Urban Splash about the manner in which the lease from the project had been transferred to Urban Splash to PHD1. He testified that Mr Falkingham had initially complained verbally and Mr Reeves told him to put it in writing.
"That written complaint was not seen by the panel as it did not exist. Mr Falkinghamcame to the hearing and stated clearly that no such complaint had been made. Tony Reeves not only lied to the panel, he had commissioned an investigation based on nothing other than his own agenda to find fault and remove me from my employment with the council."
The tribunal concluded its evidence yesterday and a result is expected in the coming weeks.
