Fecitt and others and Public Concern at Work v NHS Manchester  IRLR 64 CA
Reports relating to this case:
Whistleblowing: Correct test for determining if whistleblower subjected to detriment on the ground that he or she made a protected disclosure
- 22 May 2012
In Fecitt and others and Public Concern at Work v NHS Manchester  IRLR 64 CA, the Court of Appeal upheld an employment tribunal’s decision that the employees’ protected disclosures did not materially influence their employer’s treatment of them and that therefore the employer had not breached the whistleblowing legislation. It also held that the employer was not vicariously liable for the bullying of the whistleblowers carried out by some of their fellow employees.
- 27 October 2011
The Court of Appeal has held that the test where a worker is alleging a detriment for whistleblowing is to decide whether or not the protected disclosure has materially influenced (in the sense of being more than a trivial influence) the employer's treatment of the individual.