In a recent case called Duffy v BXTR 3, Mr Duffy worked for a hotel’s food and beverage team. Police were called to an incident at the premises. Mr Duffy alleged he told his manager that evening that fire escape doors were being left open and building security compromised, putting guests and staff at risk. He was dismissed days later. His employer denied he had made any protected disclosure and said it had already decided to dismiss him for poor performance.
Mr Duffy claimed automatic unfair dismissal on whistleblowing grounds. He applied for interim relief. The Employment Tribunal refused, pointing to fundamental disputes of fact.
However, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) disagreed. To succeed in a claim for interim relief, a claimant has to show that they have a “pretty good chance” of succeeding in their claim. Disputed facts are not, by themselves, a reason to refuse interim relief. The tribunal must still make a quick, summary assessment of how the evidence looks. They had not done so. The EAT also found that the tribunal had given inadequate reasons for refusing interim relief, having failed to address the contents of a voice recording/transcript provided by Mr Duffy. This was an important piece of evidence that needed to be weighed in the balance.
The application was remitted to the same tribunal.