Golf Club Ordered to Reinstate Member Accused of Cheating

In certain circumstances, a member of a club whose membership is unfairly terminated may be able to obtain legal redress. In a recent case, a woman who was expelled from a prestigious golf club after she was accused of cheating in a competition has succeeded in her claim for an injunction ordering the club to reinstate her.

During the competition, another player with whom she had played the round had kept score for her. After the round, she signed her scorecard to indicate that it was an accurate record of her score and inputted her scores into a computer in the clubhouse. Another member claimed that the scores on her card in respect of two of the holes had been changed. She later accepted that she had unwittingly signed for the wrong score and would have to be disqualified from the competition, but denied having deliberately altered her card in order to cheat.

She was told to appear before a meeting of the general management committee (GMC) to respond to the allegation that she had cheated. At a subsequent meeting five days later, the GMC unanimously voted that she had cheated and should be expelled from the club.

Ruling on her claim, the County Court found that, as the club's property was held on trust for its members, the case was one where an injunction could be made. The Court noted that its role was not to determine whether the GMC had made the right decision but whether the club had acted in breach of contract in terminating her membership.

The Court considered that a challenge to the rationality of the decision could not succeed. Either the woman or the player who had kept score for her had changed the scores. They both denied doing so. While the arguments that she had not cheated had merit, they did not show that a contrary view was irrational.

However, the Court found that other members' dislike of her had permeated into the decision-making process, and there was a clear bias against her. The Court also concluded that the key people involved in investigating the issue, and a number of those voting on the GMC, had determined her guilt long before she had been provided with the opportunity to answer the allegations. Evidence that was prejudicial to her had not been shared with her, denying her the opportunity to respond to it. The club had acted in breach of contract and breach of natural justice.

Ordering that her membership should be allowed to continue, the Court found that the club had a substantial membership and was large enough that any ill feeling could be put to one side or avoided. She would be able to choose whether or not to play with the members who had been involved in the events of the case. She was also awarded £1,000 for injury to feelings.