In person For the v Mr J Crozier . — 2021

Mr R Onwuka applied for interim relief after his dismissal by Tesco Stores Ltd on 1 July 2021, relying on an alleged protected disclosure complaint under s.103A Employment Rights Act 1996. Employment Judge Quill applied the s.129(1) test and the Taplin "pretty good chance" approach, and reminded himself that no binding findings of fact should be made at this stage.

The claimant relied mainly on an email of 15 April 2021 headed "election malpractice", sent to his union, and on an alleged further disclosure said to have been made to Mr Kee on 18 May 2021. The judge was prepared to proceed on the basis that the claim form alleged two disclosure occasions, but held that the April email was not the same information as set out in the detailed grounds of complaint. He considered that the claimant may well have genuinely believed the union had breached a legal obligation, but was not satisfied that there was a pretty good chance that belief would be found reasonable.

The respondent said the dismissal was for gross misconduct arising from the claimant advising colleagues on a tax scheme and receiving payments from them. The dismissal letter of 1 July 2021 referred to conduct concerns, and the appeal was not upheld. The judge held that the claimant did not have a pretty good chance of showing that the dismissal was a sham, that Mr Djazouli decided to dismiss for the alleged disclosures, or that anyone involved in the dismissal knew about and acted because of the alleged protected disclosures. He described the respondent's stated reason as plausible on the material before him and refused interim relief. No monetary remedy was awarded on this application.