Mr Z Huang v Crown Prosecution Service — 2025

At a preliminary hearing, the respondent applied to strike out parts of Mr Huang's claim. The Tribunal allowed the application in respect of allegations 33, 34, 36g, 36h and 36i, finding that those allegations had no reasonable prospect of success. The judgment records that the claim was taken at its highest on the claimant's pleadings and that the Tribunal considered proportionality under Rule 3 and the overriding objective.

The Tribunal found that Mr Huang became aware that, as a Chinese national with refugee status in the UK, he was ineligible to work for the Crown Prosecution Service and the civil service because of the Civil Service Nationality Rules. He brought that issue to the respondent's attention, recognising that he could lose his job. He was suspended, his access to the respondent's CMS account was deactivated, and he was dismissed with notice on 1 March 2024 after a formal meeting on 22 February 2024.

The Tribunal considered the claimant's argument about an Alien Certificate. It found that the two routes for such a certificate did not apply, including because the Casework Assistant role was one for which a large number of UK nationals would be available and did not require exceptional qualifications or experience. The Tribunal was satisfied that, had the claimant applied knowing he was ineligible and suggested an Alien Certificate, the request would have been refused.

On that basis, the Tribunal held that, whether or not the claimant had made a qualifying protected disclosure, the claimed detriments and the dismissal were not because of that disclosure and were not retribution for drawing his ineligibility to the respondent's attention. It found that the respondent had no option but to terminate his employment. No monetary remedy was awarded; the figure of £21,930 was recorded as the claimant's earnings as a Casework Assistant, not as compensation.