M Dennis v Foresight (North East Lincolnshire) Limited and 3 others — 2026

M Dennis applied for interim relief under section 128 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 in connection with her claim that she had been automatically unfairly dismissed for making protected disclosures. The Tribunal applied the section 129 threshold, asking whether she had a “pretty good chance” of succeeding at the final hearing, meaning a significantly higher likelihood than merely succeeding on the balance of probabilities. It stressed that its assessment was preliminary and did not determine the substantive claim.

On the material then available, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the claimant was likely to establish that she had made protected disclosures. Her pleaded case and witness statement referred generally to concerns about migration of the alternative fund manager and instructions to engage with Israeli investors, but did not specify what she had said on each alleged oral disclosure. The Tribunal’s preliminary impression was that the alleged disclosures lacked sufficient factual content and specificity to meet the required interim-relief threshold.

The Tribunal was also not satisfied that the claimant was likely to establish that protected disclosures were the principal reason for dismissal. The respondents had produced evidence of performance concerns arising before dismissal, including concerns about timely delivery of work, office attendance, conference invitations and the support provided to R3. Their evidence was also that the dismissal process reflected their understanding that the claimant had less than two years’ continuous employment and could be dismissed without a formal process. The Tribunal therefore dismissed the interim relief application; it made no monetary award and did not finally determine the section 103A claim.