Mr L Cyrus v Greenwich Students’ Union — 2025

This was the claimant’s application for interim relief following dismissal on 6 August 2025. The original claim had been presented on 13 December 2024 as race discrimination under the Equality Act 2010, and the claimant later sought to amend the claim so that the same matters were advanced as alleged protected disclosures in the alternative. By the time of the hearing, he confirmed he no longer pursued an alternative case based on trade union activity.

The tribunal set out the interim relief test under s.129 ERA 1996 and referred to London City Airport v Chacko, Taplin v C Shippam Ltd, Al Qasimi v Robinson, and Wollenberg v Global Gaming Ventures. It noted that the claimant had to show a significantly high likelihood, or a pretty good chance of success, on the underlying statutory complaint, rather than a merely arguable case.

The claimant identified six alleged protected disclosures for the interim relief application, but the tribunal found that they lacked basic specificity. They were not dated, did not identify the recipient, did not state the form of communication, and did not set out the particular words relied upon. Because of that, the tribunal said it was impossible to assess the connection between the alleged disclosures and the dismissal, or to say that the case was likely to succeed.

The tribunal therefore dismissed the interim relief application. It emphasised that it was not making findings of fact on the merits of the underlying allegations, that the exercise was a summary assessment based on limited material, and that the claimant might still succeed at a final hearing when evidence was tested. It also noted the respondent had reserved its position on a deposit order and strike out application, and that a preliminary hearing had been listed for 27 November 2025.