Mr A J Cambridge v Mott MacDonald Limited — 2021

The claimant presented an ET1 on 22 January 2021 alleging automatic unfair dismissal under section 103A ERA 1996 and a failure to make reasonable adjustments. This judgment was confined to his application for interim relief under section 128 ERA 1996, heard by CVP on 19 March 2021 before Employment Judge R F Powell. The tribunal applied the Taplin "pretty good chance" approach, and referred to the authorities it cited on protected disclosures, public interest, and causation, including Ministry of Justice v Sarfraz, Cavendish Munro, Kilraine, Chesterton Global, Boulding, Abernethy, El-Megrisi, Kuzel, Al Qasimi and Raja.

On the disclosure issues, the tribunal accepted that the claimant's written complaint of 31 August 2020, resent seven days later, and its 23 appendices criticised the respondent's plans and advice for drainage and sewerage projects. It found there was no dispute that those documents were sent to and considered by the employer. For interim-relief purposes, and in light of the claimant's technical background, the tribunal considered he had a pretty good chance of showing that he reasonably believed the information tended to show flooding, damage to watercourses, the escape of sewage and a consequent risk to health and safety. It was less certain about the claimant's contention that there had been a "cover up", and it treated the public interest point as arguable rather than conclusive.

The application failed at the causation stage. The tribunal recorded the respondent's case that the dismissal decision followed concerns about AWOL, missed meetings, refusal to work, process failures, failure to engage with support and recommendations, competencies and behaviours, together with earlier grievance and probation issues. Taking the matter only at the interim stage, and expressly not making final findings of fact, the tribunal held that the claimant did not have a "pretty good chance" of proving that any protected disclosure was the reason or principal reason for dismissal. Interim relief was therefore refused.