A former council director's redundancy package was compared at an employment tribunal to a dodgy car deal.

The tribunal heard James Foster, former director of environmental services for Eastbourne Borough Council, had negotiated a voluntary redundancy pay deal with former council chief executive Sari Conway in 1998.

But the deal had been withdrawn once it was discovered the council did not have the power to agree to the terms.

Michael Curtis, representing Mr Foster, said: "The council put itself in a position of somebody selling a car for which they had no documents.

"They were selling him a deal that they did not have the power to sell.

"That was grossly unfair and resulted in Mr Foster entering into a contract which has been personally disastrous for him."

The Brighton hearing was told the council tried to recover more than £50,000 paid to Mr Foster, from Eastbourne.

He had been through High Court and Court of Appeal hearings but benefits worth more than £100,000 were still at stake.

Mr Curtis said his client, who claims unfair dismissal, had his life ruined by his former employers.

But solicitors for the council argued Mr Foster had plenty of legal and personal advice from a solicitors' firm, another officer and a council workers' union representative.

Daniel Stilitz told the tribunal Mr Foster had entered into the deal "with his eyes wide open" and had written the report which went before a council committee agreeing his terms.

Mr Stilitz said Mr Foster had driven through the deal and the suggestion the council had welched on it was unfair.

The case was reserved and Mr Foster was told he would hear the tribunal's decision within three weeks.

Mr Foster was mainly responsible for the running of the coastal protection scheme.

Former chief executive Sari Conway was sacked from her £72,000-a-year job in February last year for gross misconduct.

She was replaced by Martin Ray, one of four senior officers who brought allegations of bullying against her.

Mr Ray was present at the hearing.

The council is the subject of a judicial review carried out by the District Auditor to determine if it acted outside its powers in Mr Foster's case.