Mrs T Cairns v Lewis’s Home Retail Ltd — 2019

Mrs T Cairns applied for interim relief after her dismissal took effect on 29 January 2019, saying the sole or principal reason was that she had made a protected disclosure on 11 January 2019 to the respondent’s owner and senior finance staff. The disclosure concerned what she believed might be an underpayment of council tax in relation to Audley House, Liverpool, and she sought reinstatement, re-engagement, or continuation of contract pending the final hearing.

The tribunal said interim relief is decided on the higher "pretty good chance of success" test from Taplin v C Shippam Limited and Dandpat v University of Bath, and that no findings of fact are made at that stage. It accepted that the email disclosure had been made and noted that, on the material before it, Mrs Cairns might have been "pretty likely to succeed" in an ordinary unfair dismissal claim, but that was not the relevant question for interim relief.

Applying s.43B and s.43C ERA 1996, together with Babula v Waltham Forest College and Chesterton Global Limited v Nurmohamed, the tribunal held that the public interest element was not shown to the necessary standard. It identified both personal and public elements in the disclosure, but said the public element had not been clearly pleaded, there was no evidence about the lender information or how it would be used, and the claimant appeared to have personal and professional concerns of her own. The tribunal said that public interest is not the same as something the public would be interested to know, particularly where the respondent was a private limited company.

Because Mrs Cairns could not show a pretty good chance of proving that the disclosure was made in the public interest, the application for interim relief failed and was dismissed. The respondent was ordered to serve its ET3 by 4 March 2019.