In Person v Respondent — 2024

The claimant applied for interim relief on the basis that the sole or principal reason for his dismissal was that he had made a protected disclosure. The tribunal recorded that he had brought complaints of public interest disclosure detriment and automatically unfair dismissal by reason of making a public interest disclosure, but this decision concerned only the interim relief application.

The tribunal found that the claimant had a pretty good chance of establishing at a final hearing that his written grievance dated 10 July 2023 tended to show a breach of legal obligation, that the disclosure was made in the public interest, and that his beliefs were reasonable. The respondent was a UK registered bank and classified as a public interest entity, and the tribunal considered that compliance with legal obligations could affect shareholders and public confidence in banking.

The application failed because the tribunal was not satisfied that the claimant had a pretty good chance of establishing that the protected disclosure was the sole or principal reason for dismissal. The tribunal noted the respondent's case about concerns over the claimant's conduct and attitude before the disclosure and whether he would accept guidance in future, and stated that the decision did not mean the claimant would not succeed at a final hearing.