Whistleblowing/Public interest disclosures

New and updated

• Type:

  FAQs

  To whom can a worker "blow the whistle"?

• Type:

  Employment law cases

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

  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.

• Type:

  Tasks

  Draw up a whistleblowing policy and procedure

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Case of the week: EAT considers school assistant's whistleblowing claim

  This week's case of the week, provided by DLA Piper, concerns a school assistant who claimed that she was dismissed for whistleblowing after she went to the press over her treatment for telling parents that their child had been bullied.

• Date:

  23 January 2013

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Acas code of practice: Uplift to compensation for failure to follow code not available to workers

  In Local Government Yorkshire and Humber v Shah EAT/0587/11 & EAT/0026/12, the EAT held that the potential uplift in compensation awarded where an employer unreasonably fails to comply with the "Acas code of practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures" applies only in the case of employees. A worker who was subjected to an unlawful detriment was not entitled to an uplift.

• Date:

  27 October 2011

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Whistleblowing victimisation: Court of Appeal sets out correct causation test

  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. 

• Date:

  25 October 2011

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Whistleblowing: EAT equates whistleblowing detriment claims with discrimination claims for purpose of employer's burden of proof

  In Fecitt and others v NHS Manchester [2011] IRLR 111 EAT, the EAT held that, where a worker has suffered a detriment following a protected disclosure, the employer must prove that its act or deliberate failure to act was “in no sense whatever” on the grounds that the employee had done the protected act.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Case round-up

  Claire Benson is managing associate and Caroline Jacobs and Chris McAvoy are associates at Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings.

• Date:

  23 August 2011

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  EAT upholds decision that former NHS trust chief executive was dismissed for making protected disclosure

  The Employment Appeal Tribunal has upheld the employment tribunal decision that a former NHS trust chief executive was automatically unfairly dismissed for making a protected disclosure. 

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Employee fairly dismissed for sabotaging hidden microphones

  This case concerns whether or not an employee, who had less than one year's service, was unfairly dismissed for making a protected disclosure.