In person For the v Respondent — 2018

This was a preliminary hearing on the respondent's applications to strike out the claim and for a deposit order. The claimant, who had been employed as a warehouse manager from 1 July 2018 until his dismissal on 14 January 2019, said he had been dismissed after raising health and safety concerns about the warehouse, including fire hazards and rats. The respondent maintained that the dismissal was for gross misconduct, specifically dishonest reporting of signing-in times, and also referred to poor performance, honesty concerns, staff relationships and the claimant's attitude toward the managing director.

The tribunal recorded that the claimant had initially framed the case as unfair dismissal for raising health and safety issues, but by the hearing it was being advanced as a public interest disclosure dismissal claim under section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996. Mr Kohanzad for the respondent accepted that the claimant was making a qualifying disclosure in relation to health and safety concerns, but submitted that there was little reasonable prospect of success. The tribunal declined to make a deposit order, noting that the claimant had concluded within about a week of dismissal that the reason given for dismissal could not be substantiated and that the true reason was said to be the protected disclosure.

The strike-out application was dismissed upon withdrawal. The tribunal did not determine the merits of the whistleblowing dismissal claim and said the disputed factual issues should be heard by a judge with all relevant evidence. The claimant was allowed to proceed to a final hearing on the section 103A claim.