A question from the UK here, regarding a friend of mine (no really) who I feel has been treated unfairly - just hoping there are some UK law-gurus on here too!
Basically E was arrested for shoplifting, an allegation he denied. He duly went to court where he was found NOT guilty. E's manager had attended court with him to *offer support*... During the hearing E's previous convictions were mentioned: both were Public Order Act offences (section 4, section 5) and both were spent, having occurred when E was a juvenile, some 17 years ago!
E's manager went back to the HR department and informed them of E's 'previous', whereupon they dismissed him. The reasons? 1) Failing to mention convictions (spent, spent, spent!) and 2) The HR director said that, despite being found NOT guilty it was her opinion that E had intended to steal goods!
I'm incredulous as I know that this is hugely, fundamentally wrong - but I don't know the legalities (I'm thinking Data Protection Act? Rehabilitation of Offenders Act??). E has his appeal on Tuesday so any advice would be HUGELY gratefully received.
Thanks all ~ have a great weekend.