A REPORT that found councillors guilty of bullying one of their own officers has been declared null and void despite warnings that the move leaves the authority open to legal action.

The Penn Report, commissioned by Richmondshire District Council, ruled last summer that a document signed by five councillors and sent to the media amounted to the bullying of monitoring officer Margaret Barry.

The row followed claims by Councillors John Blackie, the leader of the council, John Harris, Stuart Parsons, Sheila Clarke and Wendy Morton, who has since resigned, that a political group, the Independent Coalition for Richmondshire, was formed illegally.

The Standards Board for England later cleared the "Richmondshire Five", as they became known, of the allegations.

The five said that, because the Standards Board was a higher authority, its findings outweighed those of the Penn Report.

On Tuesday, the council narrowly backed a call by Councillor Linda Curran to declare the Penn Report null and void.

Chief executive Harry Tabiner, who commissioned independent inspector Richard Penn's report, declared an interest and left the meeting.

He first circulated written advice to members.

The advice said that ditching the report's conclusions exposed the authority to the risk of legal action for breach of contact because Mrs Barry could argue that a duty of trust and confidence owed by the council had been broken.

Coun Curran withdrew a bid to have council decisions based on the report's finding struck from the record after Mr Tabiner said it was illegal to amend minutes once they had been agreed.

She told the meeting: "This is not a negative motion, not a motion that apportions any blame or criticism of the people who took part in the Penn Report or of the council.

"The spirit of this motion is to draw a line under what has gone on in the past in this council and take us forward in the spirit of working together."

Coun Bill Glover, leader of the Independent Coalition, said that he supported the spirit of Coun Curran's motion, but he could not back it because of the risk of legal action.

Coun William Heslop condemned the motion as "divisive, inflammatory and an attempt to rewrite history".