Case 6002618/2024 · Employment Tribunal
- IN PERSON FOR THE v Mr M. Islam-Choudhury — 2024
- Case reference
- 6002618/2024
- Decision date
- 11 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
- IN PERSON FOR THE
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was an interim relief hearing, not a final liability hearing. The claimant had been dismissed on 14 May 2024, with the effective date of termination on 15 May 2024, and applied on the basis that he had made protected disclosures and was therefore likely to succeed in an automatic unfair dismissal claim under s103A ERA 1996. The tribunal reminded itself that the s129 ERA 1996 test required more than a balance of probabilities and asked whether there was a good chance of success on the material issues.
The tribunal accepted that it was likely that at least one of the matters relied on by the claimant, and probably more, disclosed information tending to show a breach of legal obligations under the Equality Act 2010. However, it was not satisfied that it was likely the claimant would establish the public interest element. The judge held that the respondent had a genuine issue on whether the complaints were made in the public interest or instead related to disputes personal to the claimant, noting that the allegations concerned his own treatment by the respondents and did not obviously affect a wider cohort.
On the reason for dismissal, the tribunal also found that it could not say at this stage that it was likely the claimant would prove the disclosures were the reason or principal reason for dismissal. The claimant relied on timing, the handling of the redundancy process, and an asserted pre-determined decision, while the respondent pointed to contemporaneous evidence that the claimant’s role had been under discussion before the relied-on disclosures and that the redundancy process was supported by documentary material. Because the outcome depended on disputed questions of fact and inference, the tribunal was not persuaded that the higher threshold for interim relief had been met.
The application for interim relief was therefore dismissed. No compensation or other monetary award was made in this judgment. The tribunal noted that another claim, 1403647/23, was listed for a further case management hearing on 30 July 2024.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Application for interim relief under s128 ERA 1996 arising from an alleged automatic unfair dismissal claim under s103A ERA 1996; the tribunal did not determine the underlying liability claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- s128 ERA 1996
- s129 ERA 1996
- s103A ERA 1996
- s43B ERA 1996
- Ministry of Justice v Sarfraz [2011] IRLR 562
- Chesterton Global Ltd & Anor v Nurmohamed & Anor (Rev 1) [2017] EWCA Civ 979
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.