Mr A Goddard v European Metal Recycling Limited — 2022

Mr A Goddard applied for interim relief after being dismissed by European Metal Recycling Limited on 29 August 2022. He said he had been dismissed for making protected disclosures, including defect reports about machinery and a report to the HSE concerning a near miss. The respondent said the dismissal was for conduct, unsatisfactory course management, and attitude and behaviour during probation.

Employment Judge Flood set out the statutory test under ss.128 and 129 ERA 1996 and the authorities on interim relief, including the need to show a "pretty good chance" of success. On a summary assessment, the tribunal concluded that Mr Goddard was likely to establish the first four elements of a protected disclosure case: that he made disclosures, that he believed they tended to show matters within s.43B(1), that that belief was reasonable, and that the disclosures were made in the public interest.

The application failed on causation. The tribunal was not satisfied, on the material available at the interim stage, that Mr Goddard had shown a pretty good chance of proving that any protected disclosures were the sole or principal reason for dismissal. It noted a live dispute of fact about whether the respondent objected to the fact of raising safety concerns or instead to the way and frequency with which issues were raised, alongside evidence about course cancellations, alleged poor behaviour, and some manager comments that supported both sides' positions. Interim relief was therefore refused, and the tribunal directed that case management would be needed to clarify the pleaded disclosures and disclosure of documents.