Ms S. Messi v Manpower UK Ltd and 1 other — 2021

The Claimant applied to postpone the interim relief hearing on the basis of Covid-19 symptoms and an NHS isolation note. The Tribunal refused the postponement, finding no special circumstances under section 128(5) ERA 1996 or exceptional circumstances under rule 30A, taking into account that this was a second postponement application, the urgent nature of interim relief applications, the absence of medical evidence showing she was unfit to attend a video hearing, and her ability to respond promptly to Tribunal correspondence the previous day.

On the interim relief application, the Tribunal applied the test that the relevant claim must be likely to succeed at a full hearing, meaning a good chance. The relevant claim was under section 103A ERA 1996, requiring the Claimant to show dismissal and that the reason or principal reason was protected disclosures.

For the First Respondent, the Tribunal found no evidence before it that the Claimant had been dismissed. The documents indicated that termination of an assignment was not termination of employment, and some of the Claimant's own communications indicated continuing employment. For the Second Respondent, the Tribunal found no evidence that it was the Claimant's employer. The application for interim relief against both Respondents therefore failed.