Claimant v The Blessed Peter Snow Catholic Academy Trust
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the reason for dismissal was long-term sickness absence and capability, not the protected disclosures. The decision makers had all information before them, and the dismissal fell within the range of reasonable management responses given the lack of prospect of return to work.
The tribunal found that Katrina Santoro was not an authorised recipient of protected disclosures, and even if the disclosure of 24 June 2021 was protected, the evidence firmly pointed away from that being the reason for dismissal. The decision makers' minds were focused on the claimant's long-term absence, not the disclosures.
The tribunal found no qualifying disclosure was made to an authorised person. The alleged disclosures of 24 June 2021 and 3 January 2023 were not found to be the operative reason for dismissal. The claimant did not put to decision makers that protected disclosures were the real reason for dismissal.
Facts
The claimant was dismissed following long-term sickness absence. She alleged she made protected disclosures on 24 June 2021 (to Katrina Santoro) and 3 January 2023 about alleged misconduct and bullying. The claimant contended her dismissal was related to these disclosures. A medical report dated 16 August 2023 was not released to the employer before dismissal proceedings. The claimant had no prospect of returning to work at the time of dismissal.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all claims finding the reason for dismissal was capability due to long-term sickness absence, not protected disclosures. The tribunal found Katrina Santoro was not an authorised recipient of disclosures, and in any event the disclosures did not operate on the minds of decision makers. The dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. The reconsideration application was dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success.
Practical note
A reconsideration application that merely seeks to re-argue an unsuccessful case without identifying a legal or factual error will be dismissed at the preliminary filter stage as having no reasonable prospect of the original judgment being varied or revoked.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1802988/2024
- Decision date
- 19 November 2025
- Hearing type
- reconsideration
- Hearing days
- 5
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- education
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No