D McDougall and A Matheson Mr Stephen Leighton v Renfrewshire Council — 2024

The claimant alleged that he had done a protected act by supporting a disabled tenant with autism to move temporarily while repairs were carried out, and that he was then subjected to detriments including being moved to alternative duties, having whistleblowing concerns rejected, losing earnings from alternative employment, and an alleged attempt to secure withdrawal of a grievance in return for a positive reference.

The tribunal held that providing support to the tenant did not amount to a protected act within section 27(2)(c) Equality Act. It found that the request for support was made to enable the tenant to move temporarily and to avoid the problem identified by the claimant, rather than being something done for the purposes of or in connection with the Equality Act in the relevant sense.

The tribunal also considered causation in the alternative. It found that the claimant was moved to alternative duties because a complaint had been made against him and was to be investigated, not because of any protected act. It found that the rejection of his whistleblowing concerns was not a detriment, and in any event was not shown to be because of a protected act. It also found that the alleged loss of earnings and alleged blackmail were not made out as detriments caused by a protected act. The claim was dismissed.