Mrs K Reast v Practice Plus Group Hospitals Limited — 2026

The claimant complained that she had suffered detriment because of whistleblowing. The respondent accepted that the claimant had made a protected public interest disclosure about alleged unsafe training practices in the ophthalmology department, and the tribunal accepted that the three alleged detriments occurred and were detriments.

The tribunal found that the respondent had shown the detriments were not done on the ground of the protected disclosure. It found the sick pay decision was based on the understood sickness absence policy and contractual provisions, the suspension was because of the claimant's conduct at the time following a medical near miss, and the formal capability process and final written warning were because of the claimant's performance at the time.

The complaints of detriment on the grounds of whistleblowing therefore failed and were dismissed. No remedy was awarded.