Norbrook Laboratories (GB) Ltd v Shaw: EAT 24 Jan 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 same individual or department and taken separately each email was not such a disclosure. Goode v Marks and Spencer plc UKEAT/0442/09 15 April 2010 para 37 applied. Further, drawing a dangerous state of affairs to an employer’s attention is capable of constituting a disclosure of information within the meaning of section 43B(1)(d). The information given in the emails was not too general to constitute disclosure of information within ERA section 43B(1). Appeal from the decision on the preliminary issue of whether the disclosures relied upon by the Claimant are capable of amounting to qualifying disclosure dismissed.

Slade J
[2014] UKEAT 0150 – 13 – 2401
Bailii
England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 29 November 2021; Ref: scu.520754