Ms M Dolata v University of East London — 2025

The hearing was listed to determine Ms Dolata's application for interim relief in claim 6014376/2025. The claimant relied on an alleged protected public interest disclosure made on 11 September 2024 and said her dismissal by reason of redundancy on 16 April 2025 was because of that disclosure. The tribunal noted that the wider claims also included allegations that the dismissal was disability and/or indirect sex discrimination, but those claims were not determined at this hearing.

Employment Judge Manley applied the interim relief test under sections 128 to 132 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, including the requirement that it appear likely that the tribunal at the final hearing would find the reason or principal reason for dismissal was within section 103A. The judge referred to Taplin v C Shippam Ltd, Ministry of Justice v Sarfraz, Parsons v Airplus International Ltd, Dandpat v University of Bath, and Wollenburg v Global Gaming Ventures as authorities on the high threshold and summary nature of the assessment.

The judge found that the claimant could not show a pretty good chance of succeeding in the interim relief application. On the preliminary assessment, the claimant would first have to show a good chance that the September 2024 document met all the tests for a qualifying disclosure under section 43B ERA, including disclosure of information, a relevant failure, reasonable belief, and public interest. The judge considered that this was not clear at this stage.

The judge also found it harder for the claimant, in the context of a restructure affecting around 18 people and a redundancy dismissal, to show a causal connection between any public interest disclosure and the decision to dismiss her. The tribunal could not say that the claimant had a pretty good chance of showing that connection, and the application for interim relief was refused. No monetary remedy was awarded or considered in this judgment.