Sarah King Employment Solicitor Northampton

Excello Law

  • Facebook
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
01832 776464

  • Home
  • About Me
  • Services
  • News
  • Contact
  • Testimonials
    • Testimonials – employees
    • Testimonials – employers
  • Events
You are here: Home / Archives for News / News - Whistleblowing

Whistleblowing to prescribed people

10/02/2016 by Sarah King Leave a Comment

whistleblowing casesWhistleblowers have protection from dismissal and detriments if they blow the whistle to their employer.  In addition, workers can blow the whistle to a prescribed person in order to get protection although the hoops the worker must go through to claim the protection are harder for those that blow the whistle in this way.

This February, the Government has revised the list of prescribed people to whom the whistle can be blown and this has been updated.  You can read the full list here but this includes Offcom, the Bank of England, the Charities Commission and the Children’s commissioner.

Tag(s): unfair dismissal after I blew whistle, whistleblow the trusth, whistleblow to someone other than employer, whistleblower to charity commission, whistleblowing case, whistleblowing protection

Disclosure in the public interest

10/04/2015 by Sarah King Leave a Comment

whistleblowing casesA requirement was added for whistleblowers that the disclosure be made in the public interest.  This was added to prevent Claimant’s relying on complaints concerning their own contracts. The question remained however as to how wide the public interest requirement was.

The EAT held in Chestertons v Nurmohamed that the Claimant can have a reasonable belief is in the public interest if it relates to a contractual dispute affecting a group of staff.  The EAT held that an individual contractual dispute would not normally satisfy the public interest following the amendments made in the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 but that a disclosure concerning a relatively small group may satisfy the test, each case would turn on its own facts.

In this case the facts were that the Claimant was a director in the Mayfair office of Chestertons’ estate agency who said that he made a protected disclosure by complaining that the agency was overstating costs for its London office which drove down his bonus and that for 100 other senior managers.  The employment tribunal found that the disclosure was made with a reasonable belief that it was ‘in the public interest’, and the Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld the decision.

Tag(s): Employment law news, enterprise and regulatory reform act 2013 amendments, public interest dislcosure, public interest test in whistleblowing, settlement agreement solicitor kettering, settlement agreement solicitor oundle, settlement agreement solicitor thrapston

Whistleblowing consultation

13/08/2014 by Sarah King Leave a Comment

whistleblowing casesSome years ago an amendment was made to the ET1 form whereby you could ask the Tribunal to refer on the claim if it involved a claim relating to whistleblowing to the appropriate regulator.  There was much debate in practice as to whether tactically it was advisable to tick that box or not.

I have since been asked by clients what happens if I tick that box and my answer is of course well the Tribunal would pass the matter on.  What happens then is the next question.  Well up until now that has depended on the regulator and in my experience the answer has been not a lot that we were aware of.  Well at least not to our knowledge, as we have not been told that an investigation is under way etc.

The Government has commenced consultation asking exactly how regulators should be obliged to report on any disclosures they receive.  They have declined to make substantial changes to the existing Public Interest Disclosure Act but is proposing to make the regulators report annually on such disclosures. The consultation ends on 30th September 2014 and covers the areas where the regulator will be required to report.  The annual reports  would be general reports covering numbers of disclosures made and number that were investigated, resolved, referred on etc but would not cover the identity of the employee or the employer to whom the disclosure relates.

Anonymity makes sense to avoid discouraging those from whistleblowing and it is hoped that the report will ensure a more consistent approach across the regulators and that employees are more likely to feel that their concerns are being taken seriously.  Over time however, it will also be important for the regulator to investigate and take action to win the public’s confidence when the reports are published annually.

You can have your say on the consultation here.

Tag(s): detriment from disclosure, employment solicitor thrapston, ET1 forms, public interest disclosure act, tribunal case, whistleblowing consultation, whistleblowing regulators

Whistleblowing cases

09/04/2014 by Sarah King Leave a Comment

whistleblowing casesThe EAT in the recent decision of Blackbay Ventures Ltd t/a Chemistree v Gahir set out an approach that Employment Tribunals should take when considering protected disclosure cases, which may also assist those representing clients in such cases or those bringing such cases.

The EAT identified a number of steps that may be taken by the Tribunal, which can be adapted to present a more watertight case, as follows:

a. Each disclosure should be separately identified by reference to date and content.

b. Each alleged failure or likely failure to comply with a legal obligation, or matter giving rise to the health and safety of an individual having been or likely to be endangered as the case may be should be separately identified.

c. The basis upon which each disclosure is said to be protected and qualifying should be addressed.

d. Save in obvious cases if a breach of a legal obligation is asserted, the source of the obligation should be identified and capable of verification by reference for example to statute or regulation. It is not sufficient as here for the Employment Tribunal to simply lump together a number of complaints.  ,

e. The Employment Tribunal should then determine whether or not the Claimant had the reasonable belief referred to in S43 B1 of ERA 1996 under the ‘old law’ whether each disclosure was made in good faith; and under the ‘new’ law introduced by S17 Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 (ERRA), whether it was made in the public interest.

f. Where it is alleged that the Claimant has suffered a detriment, short of dismissal it is necessary to identify the detriment in question and where relevant the date of the act or deliberate failure to act relied upon by the Claimant. This is particularly important in the case of deliberate failures to act because unless the date of a deliberate failure to act can be ascertained by direct evidence the failure of the Respondent to act is deemed to take place when the period expired within which he might reasonably have been expected to do the failed act.

g. The Employment Tribunal under the ‘old law’ should then determine whether or not the Claimant acted in good faith and under the ‘new’ law whether the disclosure was made in the public interest.

These sorts of cases are notoriously hard to establish.  Detriments because of whistleblowing are often covert.

 

Tag(s): employment solicitor northamptonshire, employment solicitor Raunds, employment solicitor Rushden, protection from a detriment, unfair dismissal claim, whistleblowing cases, whistleblowing test

  • 1
  • 2
  • Next Page »

Our articles

  • Ask The Expert (7)
  • Events (7)
  • News (299)
    • News – Business Briefing (8)
    • News – Compromise/settlement agreements (13)
    • News – Contracts and Pay (38)
    • News – Discrimination (34)
    • News – Employee share agreements (2)
    • News – Employment Tribunal Rules (58)
    • News – Equal Pay (5)
    • News – Flexible working (1)
    • News – General (11)
    • News – Glossary (3)
    • News – Holidays and Holiday pay (11)
    • News – HR practice (25)
    • News – Maternity leave and paternity (6)
    • News – My news (9)
    • News – National Minimum Wage (11)
    • News – Parental leave (8)
    • News – Redundancy (5)
    • News – TUPE (12)
    • News – Unfair dismissal (31)
    • News – Whistleblowing (8)
  • Publications (1)
  • Testimonials (43)
    • Testimonials – Employees (33)
    • Testimonials – Employers (10)
  • Useful Resources (7)

Looking for something specific?

Our latest events

Discrimination Awareness Workshop

Workshop – Discrimination awareness – 20th October 2021

Workshop – How to handle conduct issues and grievances – 6th October 2021

Workshop – How to handle conduct issues and grievances

Workshop – How to handle conduct issues and grievances – 4th March 2020

Employment Law Update 2020

Employment law update 2020 – 5th February 2020

How to maximise attendance and manage performance workshop

Workshop – How to maximise attendance and manage performance – 7th March 2019

My latest Tweets

  • Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year https://t.co/EIq3uxwvwq 22/12/2020 10:36 am
  • ACAS early conciliation extension https://t.co/EzykpAQZX1 02/12/2020 3:20 pm
  • Good news for business but too late for many now redundant because furlough was ending #toolate £1000 bonus has bee… https://t.co/DpPEtn1JKI 05/11/2020 10:11 pm
  • Furlough scheme extended and JSS delayed by a month. Furlough extension at no % top up just pension and ni to be me… https://t.co/xcULZllN45 31/10/2020 9:47 pm
  • National lockdown from Thursday 😢and furlough to be extended. No idea in what form and whether it will save busines… https://t.co/vRqog54uuZ 31/10/2020 7:35 pm

Latest training

Our Address

Meetings by appointment at:
The Hall
Thorpe St
Raunds
Wellingborough
NN9 6LT

Correspondence address:
Excello Law Ltd
5 Chancery Lane
London
WC2A 1LG

Other offices:
Chester, Leeds & Liverpool

Sarah King t/a SK Employment Law is not a firm of solicitors. Sarah King is a consultant solicitor at Excello Law Limited and legal services are provided by Excello Law Limited which is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under SRA number 512898.

Excello Law is authorised and regulated by The Solicitors Regulation Authority

· website by Silver Websites · All Rights Reserved · Privacy · Site Map ·

Back to Top

This website uses cookies. You may delete or block all cookies from this site in your browser options. By continuing to use this site you accept this. Read More
Accept Reject
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled

Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.

Non-necessary

Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.

SAVE & ACCEPT