Claimant v Cumberland House Surgery, a partnership
Outcome
Individual claims
The claimant claimed automatic unfair dismissal pursuant to s103A Employment Rights Act 1996 (whistleblowing). The tribunal found after a three-day full merits hearing that the claim was not well founded and dismissed it. The claimant failed to establish that she was dismissed for making protected disclosures.
Facts
Miss Aspinall was employed by Cumberland House Surgery, a medical partnership. She brought a claim of automatic unfair dismissal alleging she was dismissed for making protected disclosures under whistleblowing legislation. The case proceeded to a full merits hearing over three days in November 2025. The claimant represented herself while the respondent was represented by a litigation consultant.
Decision
Employment Judge KM Ross dismissed the whistleblowing claim, finding it was not well founded. The tribunal concluded that the claimant had not established that she was dismissed for making protected disclosures under s103A Employment Rights Act 1996. Oral reasons were given at the hearing.
Practical note
A claimant alleging automatic unfair dismissal for whistleblowing must establish both that qualifying protected disclosures were made and that the dismissal was because of those disclosures.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6011184/2024
- Decision date
- 5 November 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No