Ms E Stearn (Counsel) For the v Ms B Omotosho (Solicitor) — 2026

Employment Judge K J Palmer, sitting alone at Bury St Edmunds by CVP on 20 February 2026, heard the Claimant's application for interim relief under sections 128-129 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The application was made on the basis that the Claimant alleged she had been automatically unfairly dismissed under section 103A ERA for making protected disclosures. The Claimant had been dismissed on 9 January 2026, purportedly by reason of redundancy following the closure of the sales and marketing department.

The Claimant relied on two alleged protected disclosures: a verbal disclosure made in a meeting on 13 November and an email of 19 November to Mr Burrows and Mr Holloway, both concerning TPS screening. Applying the test in Taplin v C Shippam [1978] IRLR 450 as explained in Ministry of Justice v Sarfraz [2011] IRLR 562, the Judge held that 'likely' required something nearer to certainty than mere probability. In respect of the first disclosure, the Judge could not conclude there was a pretty good chance it would amount to a protected disclosure without further evidence-testing at trial. In respect of the second disclosure, while it appeared on the face of it to have a pretty good chance of being a qualifying and protected disclosure, the Claimant could not show a pretty good chance that the disclosures were the principal reason for dismissal.

The Judge noted that, on the face of the evidence, a documented analysis preceded the decision to close the loss-making department, three individuals were placed at risk and treated the same, with one redeployed and two dismissed. The high bar for interim relief was not crossed, and the application was accordingly refused.