Claimant v Respondent — 2026

The claimant alleged that the respondent automatically unfairly dismissed him for making protected disclosures, contrary to section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and applied for interim relief. The respondent conceded that his WhatsApp message to Ben Wheeler and email to Karen Williams on 2 March 2026, reporting that one of its vehicles was untaxed, amounted to a protected disclosure. The tribunal did not determine the claimant's separate ordinary unfair dismissal claim at this hearing.

The tribunal considered whether there was a pretty good chance that the final hearing would find the disclosure to have been the reason or principal reason for dismissal. The respondent maintained that the claimant was dismissed following a WhatsApp message, intended for his wife but accidentally sent to Mr Wheeler, which used disrespectful language about Mr Wheeler and discussed the untaxed vehicle. On the documents available, the tribunal was not persuaded that a final tribunal was likely to find the disclosure and the conduct in that message inseparable; the argument that the message would not have existed but for the vehicle issue did not establish the required causal connection.

The tribunal also found little in the material before it to indicate that the protected disclosure was an operative cause of dismissal. It noted that the respondent promptly rectified the tax issue, that the claimant had not asserted during the dismissal process that he was being punished for reporting it, and that there was no identified documentary or witness evidence that the respondent was irked by the disclosure. Without making binding findings of fact, the tribunal assessed the likelihood of the disclosure being found to be the reason or principal reason for dismissal as low and refused interim relief. No monetary remedy was awarded or determined.