Mr C Massey v Wren Music (a company limited by guarantee) and 4 others — 2022

Employment Judge O’Rourke heard the claimant’s application for interim relief on 18 November 2022 after his dismissal with effect from 21 October 2022 from his role as communications and marketing officer. The claim was advanced as an automatic unfair dismissal and detriment case based on protected disclosures about fire safety at the respondent’s premises. In closing submissions the respondent accepted that the claimant’s email of 27 July 2022 constituted a protected disclosure.

The tribunal set out the interim relief test from section 129 ERA 1996 and the authorities it relied on, including Taplin v C Shippam Ltd and Ministry of Justice v Sarfraz. It considered whether the claimant had a pretty good chance of success at the final hearing. The tribunal noted that the claimant had received positive feedback in May and July 2022 and that no performance concerns had been raised at the four-month review on 23 June 2022.

The tribunal found that, apart from Ms Wilson’s oral evidence, there was no other evidence that the respondent had performance concerns before the protected disclosure. It also noted that there was no corroborative documentation for the asserted July concerns, or for the claimed earlier discussion about a probation meeting. The tribunal did not read those evidential gaps as a cover-up, but said it had to decide on the evidence before it.

The tribunal held that it was not necessary for the protected disclosure to be the only reason for dismissal. It accepted that performance concerns may also have played a part, but found that, on the material before it, the protected disclosure was likely to have been the principal reason for dismissal. Interim relief was therefore granted and an order for continuation of the claimant’s contract of employment was made on the same date. The written reasons do not record any monetary award.