Mr Jack Scanlan v Represented by:10 Mr B Duffy - Lay representative MML Leisure Limited and 2 others — 2024

The hearing was an application for interim relief under section 128 ERA 1996 arising from the claimant's section 103A automatic unfair dismissal complaint. No respondent attended, no live evidence was heard, and the tribunal proceeded on the claimant's statement and documents. It reminded itself that the question was whether the claim was likely to succeed at final hearing, not whether the underlying complaint was finally proved.

The tribunal found that the claimant had disclosed information to his manager that the second respondent was operating the bar without the necessary alcohol licence. It held that this was, on its face, a matter that tended to show a breach of legal obligation and was a matter of public interest, so the claimant was likely to show a qualifying disclosure. The tribunal also noted that he was dismissed the next day, that the reason given was a vague statement that he 'no longer fits in', and that he was barred from the premises, which led it to infer that the disclosure was likely to be the reason for dismissal.