Case 1600182/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Davies v University of South Wales — 2023
- Case reference
- 1600182/2023
- Decision date
- 6 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Brace Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Davies
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal heard the Claimant's application for interim relief on 30 May 2023. It accepted that the application had been made in time and was procedurally correct under s.128(2) ERA 1996. The issue was whether, on a broad summary assessment, the Claimant had a pretty good chance of succeeding at the full hearing of his automatic unfair dismissal complaint.
For the application, the Claimant relied not on disclosures he had personally made, but on emails sent by Ms A Mison on 10 and 21 October 2022. Those emails referred to alleged staffing difficulties, a possible ghost employee, a server chain of custody issue, and an alleged cover-up. Ms Mison accepted that she had not told the Respondent that she was making the disclosures on the Claimant's behalf, and the Claimant was not named in them.
The Tribunal held that the Claimant had not shown it was likely that he had made any protected disclosure, and therefore had not shown a pretty good chance of succeeding on the automatic unfair dismissal claim. It also said that, even if Ms Mison's emails were treated as disclosures on his behalf, the Claimant had not shown they were protected under the statutory provisions relied on, nor that he had a pretty good chance of establishing constructive dismissal or the necessary causal link. The application for interim relief was dismissed, with the substantive claim left for the main hearing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The judgment dismissed only the Claimant's application for interim relief under s.128 ERA 1996 in respect of an alleged automatic unfair dismissal claim. The substantive claim was not finally determined, and the Tribunal also noted that a final hearing would have to consider constructive dismissal and causation. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
11 references- s.128 ERA 1996
- s.128(2) ERA 1996
- s.129 ERA 1996
- Taplin v Shippam Limited
- Ministry of Justice v Sarfraz
- Simply Smile Manor House Ltd and ors v Ter-Berg
- Kilraine v LB Wandsworth
- s.43A ERA 1996
- s.43B ERA 1996
- s.43G ERA 1996
- s.103A ERA 1996
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.