Mr S Thomas v The Woodland Trust — 2019

Mr Thomas was employed by The Woodland Trust from 8 July 2019 and was dismissed on 16 September 2019, so he did not have two years' service for an ordinary unfair dismissal claim. He sought interim relief on the basis that his dismissal was automatically unfair because it was for protected disclosures. The tribunal said the question at this stage was whether the claim had a "pretty good chance of succeeding" and referred to Taplin v C Shippam Limited [1978] ICR 1068.

The judge treated the 12 July 2019 report as a potential protected disclosure. That report raised concerns about data protection compliance and allegations of bullying and harassment by Anne Lightowler. Those complaints were investigated; the tribunal recorded that the data protection concerns were recognised, but the bullying and harassment allegations were found to be unfounded. The claimant appealed, and the tribunal noted that the employer was still seeking to get him back into work, including at the meeting on 3 September 2019.

The tribunal then considered the claimant's later grievance about allegedly missing emails and the suggestion of a cover-up. It found that the emails had been generated by the claimant, were not personal information, and had not been deleted by the respondent, so there was no reasonable basis for the allegation. On that basis, the judge held that this second disclosure was not a protected disclosure for section 43B ERA 1996 purposes.

By the disciplinary stage, the employer relied on the claimant having misled it about the length of his last employment and on the unfounded grievance about the SAR/emails issue. The dismissal letter said there had been a fundamental loss of trust and confidence. The tribunal found that the dismissal was not because the claimant had made a protected disclosure, so section 103A ERA 1996 was not engaged. Interim relief was therefore refused, and the claim was left to continue in the ordinary way.