Mr. O. E. Olarewaju v BUPA Care Services Limited — 2025

The tribunal heard only the Claimant's application for interim relief on 25 September 2025. The application had been presented on 15 August 2025, within seven days of the Claimant's summary dismissal on 8 August 2025 for gross misconduct. Employment Judge Sudra recorded that this hearing was not determining the underlying claims and made no findings of fact, but was confined to whether interim relief should be granted under s.128 ERA 1996.

The Claimant's case was that he had made protected disclosures in late 2024 and early 2025 and that his dismissal was because of those disclosures. The Respondent's case, as summarised in the judgment, was that the alleged disclosures were matters personal to the Claimant and were not protected disclosures, and that he had been dismissed following an investigation into misconduct complaints. The tribunal referred to the statutory test under s.129 ERA 1996 and the authorities on the meaning of "likely", including the need for a "pretty good chance of success" rather than a mere possibility.

Applying that summary assessment, the tribunal concluded that the Claimant had not shown that it was likely the full tribunal would find that the reason for dismissal was a protected disclosure. It found that the Claimant had not demonstrated that his claim was nearer certainty than possibility, and that the material before the tribunal was not sufficiently clear to justify interim relief. The application was therefore refused. No monetary award was made.