All items: Whistleblowing

• expand

  Morgan v Royal Mencap Society [2016] IRLR 428 EAT (1 report relating to this case)

  • Morgan v Royal Mencap Society: disclosure could be in the public interest

    Date:

    3 June 2016

    In Morgan v Royal Mencap Society, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that an employment tribunal was wrong to strike out a whistleblowing claim on the basis that an employee's complaint about cramped working conditions was not "in the public interest". Naomi Clarkson explains this recent employment case.

• expand

  Nelson v Smith News Trading Ltd [2010] ET/3303710/09 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Whistleblowing: employment tribunal decisions

    Date:

    7 July 2011

    This article summarises the main issues and outcomes in five employment tribunal cases that involve whistleblowing.

• expand

  Newman v Riverside Building Supplies Ltd ET/3201396/14 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Whistleblowing: complaint about line manager's rudeness to colleague not "in the public interest"

    Date:

    11 May 2015

    An employment tribunal has struck out whistleblowing claims brought by an individual who argued that he made a protected disclosure when he complained that his line manager had been rude to a colleague. The claimant did not reasonably believe that he was making the disclosure "in the public interest".

• expand

  Niester and another v Threshold Housing Link ET/1400067/2013 & ET/1400068/2013 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Whistleblowing employees fairly dismissed for disclosing concerns to the media

    Date:

    3 February 2014

    In this case, a charity fairly dismissed two whistleblowing employees for the manner in which they had raised their concerns.

• expand

  Norbrook Laboratories (GB) Ltd v Shaw EAT/0150/13 (2 reports relating to this case)

  • Whistleblowing: Protected disclosure can be made up of several communications taken together

    Date:

    30 June 2014

    In Norbrook Laboratories (GB) Ltd v Shaw EAT/0150/13, the EAT held that a worker had made a protected disclosure within the meaning of s.43B(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, by warning of the danger of sales representatives being required to drive in heavy snow. This was a disclosure of information tending to show a risk to health and safety and went beyond a mere assertion or expression of opinion. The fact that the disclosure was made through three separate emails to two different people did not alter the fact that a protected disclosure had been made.

  • Whistleblowing: emails to different individuals taken together may amount to a qualifying disclosure

    Date:

    3 February 2014

    The Employment Appeal Tribunal agreed with an employment tribunal that emails sent by the claimant taken together were capable of amounting to qualifying disclosures, even though the emails were sent to different individuals in different departments.

• expand

  Odong v Chubb Security Personnel EAT/819/02 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Case round-up: mobility clauses and "protected" whistleblowing disclosures

    Date:

    7 October 2003

    This week's case round-up from Eversheds, covering: mobility clauses and "protected" whistleblowing disclosures.

• expand

  Onyango v Berkeley t/a Berkeley Solicitors [2013] IRLR 338 EAT (1 report relating to this case)

  • Case of the week: Post-termination disclosure can constitute a protected disclosure

    Date:

    8 May 2013

    In this week's case of the week, provided by DLA Piper, the EAT held that a post-termination disclosure can constitute a protected disclosure for the purposes of a detriment claim under the Employment Rights Act 1996.

• expand

  Panayiotou v Kernaghan and others EAT/0436/13 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Whistleblowing: police officer dismissed for taking matters into his own hands

    Date:

    8 July 2014

    In DLA Piper's latest case report, the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that a police officer who made protected disclosures was dismissed after taking matters into his own hands and becoming difficult to manage because he was not satisfied with the action taken following the concerns that he had raised, and that he was not dismissed for blowing the whistle.

• expand

  Parkins v Sodexho Ltd [2002] IRLR 109 EAT (2 reports relating to this case)

  • Blowing the whistle

    Date:

    1 April 2002

    The outcome of a recent employment tribunal could pave the way for claims of unfair dismissal under the whistleblowing legislation - without the one year service required. Malcolm Pike looks at practical ways employers can protect themselves.

  • Public interest disclosure: Breach of employment contract can be a protected disclosure

    Date:

    11 March 2002

    In Parkins v Sodexho Ltd, the EAT holds that a protected disclosure for the purposes of s.43B Employment Rights Act 1996 can relate to a breach of the employee's own contract of employment.

• expand

  R v Secretary of the Central Office of the Employment Tribunals (England and Wales) ex parte Public Concern at Work [2000] IRLR 658 HC (1 report relating to this case)

  • Employment tribunals: Extent of duty to place details of tribunal claims in public domain

    Date:

    15 August 2000

    In R v Secretary of the Central Office of the Employment Tribunals, ex parte Public Concern at Work, the High Court concludes that the particulars of an originating application (IT1) that the Secretary is generally required to enter in the public register must include: the applicant's and the respondent's names; the date the application was made and received; the relief sought; and a summary of each of the grounds of the claim sufficient to enable a member of the public exercising the right of inspection to identify the gist of those grounds.