Mr A Latif v Financial Conduct Authority — 2023

The Tribunal found that the claimant made a protected disclosure in his formal whistleblowing complaint on 9 March 2021 and a limited protected disclosure to Mr Cobbett on 12 March 2021. It found that the claimant had not proved the other alleged verbal protected disclosures in supervision meetings, save for the limited point made on 12 March 2021 about the team operating unlawfully or negligently in relation to FOIA extensions.

The whistleblowing detriment claims were dismissed. The Tribunal found that many alleged acts were not proved, were out of time, or were not detriments. Where detriments were established, including aspects of the performance, grievance and disciplinary chronology, the Tribunal accepted the respondent's explanations and found they were not materially influenced by the protected disclosures. It found that the claimant's formal whistleblowing complaint had been kept confidential within the internal process until the claimant himself referred to it more widely.

The dismissal claims were also dismissed. The Tribunal found that the reason for dismissal was conduct: the claimant had deliberately forwarded a large number of emails, including sensitive or confidential information, to his personal email account. The Tribunal held that this conduct was distinguishable from making protected disclosures, that the respondent had carried out a thorough investigation and disciplinary process, and that dismissal for gross misconduct was within the range of reasonable responses.