Mr. L Fragkoulis v EMW STax Ltd — 2025

The Claimant applied for interim relief under section 128 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 pending determination of his claim under section 103A ERA that he had been automatically unfairly dismissed for making protected disclosures. The Tribunal heard the application on 16 May 2025 on the basis of written materials and submissions, without oral evidence, in accordance with Rule 94 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024.

Applying the statutory test, the Employment Judge considered whether it was likely that at a final hearing the Tribunal would find that the alleged disclosures were protected disclosures and that the making of those disclosures was the reason or principal reason for dismissal. On the material available, the Judge concluded that it could not be said it was likely the alleged communications would meet the test for a qualifying disclosure, as evidence and findings of fact were required on what was said and whether information was actually conveyed rather than mere allegations.

There was also a dispute of fact as to whether the dismissing officer, Mr. Powell, was aware of the alleged disclosures, and the Respondent's stated reason for dismissal was gross misconduct relating to the Claimant emailing work materials to his personal address. Given the time gap between the alleged disclosures and dismissal and the intervening grievance and disciplinary process, the Judge found it was not near certain or a pretty good chance that the Claimant would succeed on causation. The application for interim relief was therefore refused.