Case 2601769/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Naomi Watson Grant v Affinity Renewables Ltd At an Interim Relief Hearing at the Employment Tribunal — 2024
- Case reference
- 2601769/2024
- Decision date
- 6 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hutchinson
- Venue
- Lincoln Heard
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Naomi Watson Grant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed as an HGV Driver from 9 April 2024 until her dismissal on 11 September 2024. She brought an unfair dismissal claim under section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996, alleging that the reason or principal reason for dismissal was that she made a protected disclosure about Tax, National Insurance, and pension payments.
At the interim relief hearing, the respondent disputed that the dismissal was because of a protected disclosure and said the claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct, namely sending text messages while driving an HGV vehicle. The tribunal noted that the claim was hotly contested and would need to be determined at a full hearing on proper consideration of all the evidence.
The tribunal was not satisfied that the claimant had met the high burden for interim relief by showing that she was likely to succeed at the final hearing. The application for interim relief therefore failed and was dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The judgment dismisses the application for interim relief in a section 103A ERA protected disclosure unfair dismissal claim. It does not finally determine the underlying unfair dismissal complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
9 references- section 103A ERA 1996
- section 43B(1)(a)-(f) ERA 1996
- section 128 ERA 1996
- section 129 ERA 1996
- Williams v Brown UKEAT/004/19
- Taplin v Shippam Limited [1978] IRLR 450
- Ministry of Justice v Sarfraz [2011] IRLR 582
- Dandpat v University of Bath UKEAT/1408/09/LA
- Raja v Secretary of State for Justice UKEAT/1364/09/CEA
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.