Mr S Nunn v Aira Home UK Ltd PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2024

Mr S Nunn brought a claim of automatically unfair dismissal under s.103A ERA 1996, relying on alleged protected disclosures on 8 and 11 October 2024. The hearing on 11 November 2024 was for interim relief under ss.128-132 ERA 1996 before Employment Judge Baty sitting alone; the claimant appeared in person and Aira Home UK Ltd was represented by counsel.

The tribunal recorded that the claimant had worked for the respondent from 5 August 2024 to 11 August 2024 and remained on probation throughout his short employment. It also recorded that the respondent had received serious complaints about the claimant on 26 September 2024, concerning dangerous driving in a company-branded vehicle, and on 2 October 2024, concerning an altercation in the street while he was in company uniform and beside the company vehicle.

The asbestos incident on 8 October 2024 was the incident relied on as the protected disclosure. The claimant first sent a Teams message and a text to Mr Cox saying he had cut asbestos board and had his 'lungs full of it', but later sent another text saying the asbestos had not been cut and that the board was smaller than the hatch. The tribunal found that the claimant had not followed the respondent's asbestos procedure, having moved the board outside and bagged it before raising the issue.

Applying the interim-relief threshold in Taplin and Dandpat, the tribunal held that the claimant had not shown a 'pretty good chance' of succeeding at the final hearing. It found that the respondent was likely to have dismissed him because of an accumulation of serious incidents, specifically the driving matter and the altercation, and that any asbestos issue related to the claimant's failure to follow procedure rather than to any protected disclosure. The tribunal also found that the alleged protected disclosures formed no part, not even a contributory part, of the reason for dismissal, and that the claimant's changed account made it unlikely he could prove the necessary reasonable belief elements. Interim relief was refused and no monetary award was made.