Mr. M. Blaize v LNRS Data Services Limited — 2024

Mr M Blaize had been employed by LNRS Data Services Limited as an account manager from 11 April 2022 until his redundancy dismissal on 5 March 2024. He presented an ET1 on 4 March 2024 alleging automatic unfair dismissal for making protected disclosures and applied for interim relief. He relied on two putative public interest disclosures: a complaint about a data breach on 18 August 2023 and a complaint to the Information Commissioner on 5 January 2024. The tribunal said it was probable that at least one of those disclosures was a protected disclosure, but it did not need to go further at that stage.

Applying ss.128-130 ERA 1996 and the authorities it cited, the tribunal approached the matter as a summary assessment of whether the claimant had a pretty good chance of succeeding on the underlying claim. The respondent's evidence was that it restructured its sales function in January 2024, deleting around 14 posts including five manager roles and creating 16 new roles. Nineteen managers, including the claimant, were placed in a redundancy pool and assessed using a Balanced Scorecard and Behaviours and Values criteria. The claimant's Behaviours and Values score of 4 was set by his line manager in November 2023, before the second PID and before the line manager and reviewing manager were aware of the first PID.

The tribunal was unable to make any meaningful assessment on summary grounds that the claimant had been selected for redundancy and dismissed because he had made the PIDs. It noted the claimant's own statement in consultation that he did not believe the company had orchestrated the mass at-risk exercise just to get to him, and it also noted that he had not applied for any of the new roles. Because it could not conclude that the claimant met the higher interim-relief threshold, the application for interim relief was refused.