Ms A Sagar v Harris Federation — 2025

At a preliminary hearing on 8 September 2025, Employment Judge Joyce considered the respondent's application to strike out the claimant's whistleblowing and race discrimination claims under Rule 38, or alternatively for a deposit order under Rule 40. The Judge refused the application to strike out both claims, but made a deposit order of £100 in respect of the race discrimination claim, having concluded that it had little reasonable prospect of success.

On the whistleblowing claim, the Judge held that whether the claimant's communications about a reference she said was misleading amounted to a protected disclosure, and whether there was a causal link to the alleged detriment of not being offered a year-long contract, were matters of fact that could only properly be determined at a full merits hearing. The evidence relied on by the respondent was equally capable of being construed as supporting the claimant's case.

On the race discrimination claim, the Judge accepted that the claimant had identified two comparators of a different race who were offered year-long contracts, such that it could not be said there was no reasonable prospect of her discharging the stage 1 burden under Igen Ltd v Wong. However, because the claimant's own narrative was almost exclusively focused on the reference dispute rather than race, the Judge concluded there was little reasonable prospect of success and made a deposit order of £100 after enquiring into her means.