EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Protected disclosureTribunal entitled to decide on the facts that the employee’s belief that his disclosure tended to show matters of the kind specified under section 43B (1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was not reasonable. Judges: Underhill P J Citations: [2010] UKEAT 0167 – 10 – 2406 Links: Bailii Statutes: … Continue reading Easwaran v St George’s University of London: EAT 24 Jun 2010
EAT Practice and Procedure: No case to Answer and Public Interest Disclosure:The Employment Tribunal erred in acceding to a half-time submission of no case made in a whistle-blowing claim. Whistle-blowing is a form of discrimination claim (see Lucas v Chichester UKEAT/0713/04) and it should normally be heard in full: Logan v The Commissioners of Customs … Continue reading Boulding v Land Securities Trillium (Media Services) Ltd: EAT 3 May 2006
VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Protected disclosure The Claimant was employed by the Respondent as an Information Management and Technology Manager between December 2005 and February 2016 when he resigned. By his claim presented in August 2015 and subsequently amended, he made complaints of race discrimination, unfair dismissal and whistleblowing. The latter comprised claims of detriments suffered … Continue reading Arjomand-Sissan v East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust: EAT 17 Apr 2019
The claimant alleged that she had been dismissed for making qualifying disclosures about her employers. The employer said that her actions had not been in good faith. The claimant answered that her motive was irrelevant. The claimant appealed dismissal of her claim. Held: The minimum requirement of the Act was that the disclosures were made … Continue reading Street v Derbyshire Unemployed Workers’ Centre: CA 21 Jul 2004
Appeal from rejection of claim for detrimental treatment after protected disclosure. Citations: [2018] EWCA Civ 1436 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Rights Act 1996 43B Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment Updated: 24 April 2022; Ref: scu.618458
UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Automatically unfair reasons The Appellant contended that he had been dismissed by reason of the fact that he made a protected disclosure within the meaning of section 43B of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The Employment Tribunal held, at a Preliminary Hearing, that the disclosure made was not capable of amounting to … Continue reading Wharton v Leeds City Council (Unfair Dismissal: Automatically Unfair Reasons): EAT 6 Oct 2015
EAT Victimisation Discrimination : Protected Disclosure – DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION PROTECTED DISCLOSURE – section 43B Employment Rights Act 1996 Inadequate findings of fact by the ET as to what had actually been said by the Claimant and, if not a protected disclosure, why. Ultimately, however, the ET’s clear findings of fact as to the reason for … Continue reading Johnson v Mitie Asset Management Ltd: EAT 18 Jul 2014
chesteron_nurmohamedEAT201504 EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION Whistleblowing Protected disclosure This appeal concerns the meaning of the words ‘in the public interest’ inserted into section 43B(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 by section17 of the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013. The Respondent was Director of the Mayfair office of the First Appellant, a well-known firm of … Continue reading Chesterton Global Ltd (t/a Chestertons) and Another v Nurmohamed (Victimisation Discrimination: Whistleblowing): EAT 8 Apr 2015
Appeal against refusal by the Employment Judge to strike out Dr Armes’ claims under sections 47B, 103A and 100(1)(c) Employment Rights Act 1996. The application to strike out was made on the basis that Dr Armes had no reasonable prospect of establishing that his pleaded disclosures were ‘qualifying disclosures’ within the meaning of section 43B(1), … Continue reading Twist DX Ltd and Others v Armes and Others (Whisleblowing, Protected Disclosures): EAT 23 Oct 2020
EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATIONWhistleblowingProtected disclosureThe Employment Tribunal clearly found the Claimant was dismissed fairly by reason of redundancy. That finding meant that the claim that he was dismissed for whistleblowing failed. There was no error of law.It is reasonably arguable that the claim of per-employment detriments which failed as a matter of construction of Employment Rights … Continue reading Hinton v Argos Ltd: EAT 7 Oct 2011
EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Protected disclosureUNFAIR DISMISSAL – Automatically unfair reasonsThe Tribunal erred in law in holding that words spoken at a meeting by the Claimant did not amount to information for the purposes of section 43B of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Cavendish Munro Professional Risks Management v Geduld [2010] ICR 125 applied.The Tribunal … Continue reading Freeman v Ultra Green Group Ltd: EAT 9 Aug 2011
VICTIMISATION DICRIMINATION – Protected disclosure The Claimant alleged in her Particulars of Claim that the Respondent subjected her to a detriment because she had alleged in an email of 1 December 2015 that asking her to work certain hours would be a breach of the Working Time Regulations 1998. A list of issues agreed at … Continue reading Saha v Capita Plc: EAT 29 Nov 2018
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Estoppel or abuse of process/AmendmentThe appeal was dismissed on issue estoppel. Issue estoppel applied not to the declarations made by the first Employment Tribunal, as apparently decided in the Pre Hearing Review judgment, but to the breach of contract issues that had been decided at that first hearing as stated … Continue reading Parker v Northumbrian Water: EAT 30 Mar 2011
The Respondent, a provider of hospitals with specialist treatment programmes for patients detained under the Mental Health Act, appealed against the Decision of the ET which upheld the Claimant employee’s claim of public interest disclosure detriment pursuant to section 47B Employment Rights Act 1996. The appeal was on the grounds that the ET had: (1) … Continue reading Elysium Healthcare No2 Ltd v Ogunlami: EAT 12 Feb 2019
The claimant said his dismissal had been automatically unfair under section 106(a) which protected him as a whistleblower. The court was asked whether any disclosure had to relate to an actual criminal offence, or otherwise what would be sufficient. The claimant had reported a failure by the college to act on reports that another lecturer … Continue reading Babula v Waltham Forest College: CA 7 Mar 2007
EAT A employed R as a support worker. R made a number of protected disclosures relating to a fellow worker’s conduct towards a client. The ET held various detriments were suffered by R on the ground of the disclosures. On appeal A asserted (1) the ET did not give adequate reasons, (2) the findings were … Continue reading Cumbria County Council v Carlisle-Morgan: EAT 29 Jan 2007
Renewed application for permission to appeal. Judges: Buxton LJ, Maurice Kay LJ Citations: [2006] EWCA Civ 1154 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Rights Act 1996 47B Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Kraus v Penna Plc and Another EAT 20-Nov-2003 The claimant said that his dismissal was automatically unfair on the basis that he had … Continue reading Babula v Waltham Forest College: CA 21 Jul 2006
The claimant said that his dismissal was automatically unfair on the basis that he had made a qualifying disclosure. Held: ‘the worker’s reasonable belief in s.43B(1) relates to the information which he is disclosing and not to the existence of a legal obligation which does not actually exist. In other words if the employers are … Continue reading Kraus v Penna Plc and Another: EAT 20 Nov 2003
The employee claimed that he had been unlawfully dismissed, and that his dismissal broke the protection given to whistleblowers under the Act. The employer appealed. Held: In such claims it was necessary first for the tribunal to establish whether it had jurisdiction, by testing whether a protected disclosure had taken place, and whether that had … Continue reading ALM Medical Services Limited v Bryan Bladon: CA 26 Jul 2002
The applicant had been employed for a short period. He was dismissed, and he claimed that this was because he had made a protected disclosure in complaining about the respondent’s health and safety practices. He had applied for interim relief. The respondent company had asked that the claim be treated as vexatious, and at the … Continue reading Parkins v Sodexho Ltd: EAT 22 Jun 2001
VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Whistleblowing In a whistleblowing claim the issue was whether the Tribunal had correctly interpreted and applied section 43B(1)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996 in two respects; (1) what amounts to an allegation of a breach of a legal obligation and (2) the public interest element in light of the guidance from the Court … Continue reading Ibrahim v HCA International Ltd: EAT 13 Sep 2018
EAT (Victimisation Discrimination : Protected Disclosure) VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Detriment VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Dismissal The Employment Tribunal erred in failing to identify any legal obligation, as opposed to guidance, of which the Claimant believed the Respondent to be in breach. Accordingly the finding that the Claimant had made a qualifying disclosure within the meaning of … Continue reading Eiger Securities Llp v Korshunova: EAT 2 Dec 2016
EAT Victimisation Discrimination: Protected Disclosure One of the Claimant’s claims that he had made protected disclosures – and been subject to detriment and an automatically unfair dismissal as a result – was based on a written complaint that he and three other lorry drivers at a haulage depot had made. It was a complaint that … Continue reading Underwood v Wincanton Plc: EAT 27 Aug 2015
Victimisation Discrimination : Whistleblowing – Protected disclosure The Appellant was a policeman who was subjected to a series of detriments and was ultimately dismissed by his employer. During the course of his employment, the Appellant made a number of protected disclosures as defined in section 43B of the Employment Rights Act 1996. He contended that … Continue reading Panayiotou v Kernaghan: EAT 16 Apr 2014
EAT Victimisation Discrimination : Protected Disclosure On the facts of this case the Employment Judge did not err in holding that three emails from the Claimant to the Respondent taken together can amount to a qualifying disclosure within the meaning of Employment Rights Act 1996 section 43B(1) even though they were not sent to the … Continue reading Norbrook Laboratories (GB) Ltd v Shaw: EAT 24 Jan 2014
The claimant alleged that he had been subject to detriment and dismissal because he had made public interest disclosures. The only relevant disclosure for the purposes of the appeal was one alleged to have been made orally at a meeting on 4 October 2017. The employment tribunal failed to determine what the claimant had said … Continue reading Lumb v Greater Manchester Police (Whistleblowing, Protected Disclosures): EAT 2 Sep 2021
The House was asked as to the capacity of a limited company to sue for damage to its reputation, where it had no trading activity within the jurisdiction, and as to the extent of the Reynolds defence. The defendants/appellants had published an article which was said falsely to associate the claimants with terrorist activity. Held: … Continue reading Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl: HL 11 Oct 2006
The respondent employer was one of five bodies responsible for assessing the technical documentation and quality managements systems of manufacturers of medical devices to ensure compliance with regulations and certifying that the medical devices . .
