Case 1403234/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 1403234/2019
- Decision date
- 29 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Steven Dance, a Reception Team Leader with North Devon Healthcare NHS Trust, relied on a single verbal disclosure made in February 2018 to Lisa Lilly. He said that a colleague, KS, was self-harming and had said that he wanted to kill himself. The tribunal found that this was disclosure of information with sufficient factual content and specificity to amount to a qualifying disclosure tending to show that KS's health or safety had been, was being, or was likely to be endangered under s.43B(1)(d) ERA 1996.
The claim nevertheless failed because the tribunal accepted the claimant's own evidence that, at the time he made the report, he was concerned about the welfare of his friend and colleague and did not regard the matter as one of public interest. Applying the authorities it cited, including Kilraine, Chesterton and Ibrahim, the tribunal held that the public interest requirement was not met. It also said that any such belief would not have been reasonable in the circumstances described.
Because the disclosure was not a protected public interest disclosure under s.43A and s.43B ERA 1996, the detriment claims under s.47B could not succeed. The tribunal therefore dismissed the claimant's claims at this preliminary hearing and no remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The tribunal found that the claimant's February 2018 report about KS was information sufficient to engage s.43B(1)(d) ERA 1996, but held that the claimant did not believe at the time that the disclosure was made in the public interest. The claim therefore failed because the disclosure was not a protected disclosure. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.43A ERA 1996 protected disclosure
- s.43B(1)(d) ERA 1996 qualifying disclosure
- Kilraine sufficient factual content and specificity
- Chesterton public interest belief test
- Ibrahim two-stage public interest test
- s.47B ERA 1996 detriment on grounds of protected disclosure
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.