- IN PERSON FOR THE v Respondent — 2022

The claimant, employed by the respondent as a live-in caregiver from 17 August 2020, applied for interim relief under s128 Employment Rights Act 1996 in support of complaints of public interest disclosure detriment and automatic unfair dismissal under s103A ERA 1996. The tribunal heard the application on 28 February 2022 sitting alone, did not hear evidence, and approached the matter as a threshold question under s129 ERA 1996 whether there was a good chance that the final tribunal would find that the reason or principal reason for dismissal fell within s103A. It cited Ministry of Justice v Sarfraz [2011] IRLR 562 on the meaning of "likely" for interim relief.

The claimant said that, from July 2021 when she began caring for client PD, she had identified failings in PD's care because the respondent had supplied untrained or poorly trained staff, and she relied in part on a WhatsApp message from PD's daughter said to make a similar allegation. The respondent disputed that the claimant had made qualifying protected disclosures, pointed to an email of 28 November 2021 referring to another new carer who was not experienced in moving and handling, and argued that the claimant's complaint was in substance about her own health rather than PD's care and did not clearly fall within s43B ERA 1996.

On the reason for dismissal, the respondent relied on documentary material said to show concerns about the claimant's conduct before dismissal, including an October 2021 disciplinary investigation and warning, earlier appraisal concerns, and a Facebook post said to contain threats. The tribunal said it was not making findings of fact at this stage and concluded that, on the material before it, the threshold for interim relief was not met. The application was dismissed, and no monetary award was made.