Background

In Duffy v BXTR 3 Ltd t/a House of Gods, the claimant worked in the respondent's food and beverage team. He alleged that he made a protected disclosure to his manager concerning fire escape doors being left open and the resulting risks to the health, safety and welfare of guests and staff. He was dismissed three days later.

The claimant argued that he had been dismissed because of his protected disclosure and applied for interim relief. The employer disputed that any protected disclosure had been made and maintained that the decision to dismiss had already been taken before the alleged disclosure because the claimant was not meeting the required standards during his probationary period.

Interim relief is an exceptional remedy available in certain automatically unfair dismissal claims, including whistleblowing cases. Broadly, a claimant must demonstrate a "pretty good chance" of succeeding at the final hearing, which is a significantly higher threshold than showing that success is more likely than not.

The Employment Tribunal refused the application. It identified significant factual and credibility disputes, including whether a protected disclosure had been made and whether the decision to dismiss pre-dated it, and concluded that the claimant could not therefore demonstrate a pretty good chance of succeeding.

EAT decision

The EAT allowed the claimant's appeal.

Although the threshold for interim relief is deliberately high, the Tribunal had been wrong to treat...

Read Full Story: https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMisgFBVV95cUxOaVYxYXJOUmotM3phaHdmdW1h...