In Person For the v Mrs Peckham, Solicitor — 2019

The tribunal held that the claimant's anonymous telephone call to the CQC on 10 May 2017 was a qualifying protected disclosure. It found that she reported concerns about how residents' money was being handled at Fairview, including large cash withdrawals, the absence of the manager and the refusal of a receipt, and that the disclosure was made in the public interest to a prescribed person on a reasonable belief that safeguarding obligations were being breached.

The whistleblowing detriment claim was dismissed. The tribunal found that the initial disciplinary investigation arose because of the group chat discussion about management, that the later disciplinary process followed the claimant's conduct at the investigatory meeting and separate complaints from colleagues, and that the respondent did not know she was the CQC discloser. It accepted that the suspension lasted too long and lacked reasonable and proper cause after about six weeks, but held that the delay was due to poor prioritisation and waiting for the new general manager rather than the disclosure itself. The disciplinary hearing and the later written warning were also found not to have been materially influenced by the protected disclosure.

The unfair dismissal and breach of contract claims also failed. The tribunal held that the claimant resigned at the disciplinary hearing on 30 November 2017 and that this was a voluntary resignation rather than a dismissal in law. Although the prolonged suspension breached the implied term of mutual trust and confidence, the claimant returned to work for about three weeks afterwards, which affirmed the contract, and the tribunal found that her resignation was not in response to that breach. No remedy was awarded.