Mrs Julia Walker v DePaul UK — 2024

Mrs Julia Walker applied for interim relief under section 129 Employment Rights Act 1996 in relation to an alleged automatic unfair dismissal claim based on protected disclosures. The tribunal recorded the applicable test, including that the claimant had to show a 'pretty good chance' of succeeding and that the relevant points had to be likely to be established at the final hearing.

The tribunal was not satisfied that it could at this stage conclude that the alleged disclosures were likely to amount to qualifying disclosures under section 43B ERA 1996, or that any protected disclosures were the reason or principal reason for dismissal. It said there was insufficient factual clarity about the alleged disclosures and that causation was a fundamental problem on the material before it.

The respondent said the dismissal followed a probationary review and was based on complaints and grievances from colleagues and service users, including issues said to concern the claimant's conduct and behaviour, service users refusing to work with her, refusal to complete mandatory training, comments to a manager about not wanting to be confirmed in post, and emails sent to a personal email address in breach of data protection policies. The claimant disputed that account and said some complainants had been implicated in her own disclosures, but the judge concluded the case was too fact-sensitive to resolve on an interim basis.

The tribunal therefore refused the application. It said the matter required full ventilation of the facts at a final hearing before any meaningful assessment of the merits could be made.