Claimant v The Land Restoration Trust
Outcome
Individual claims
This was an interim relief hearing. The judge refused the application on the basis that it was not likely the tribunal would find the claimant made protected disclosures, and even if she did, it was not likely the tribunal would find that was the reason or principal reason for dismissal. The final merits hearing will determine the claim.
The judge found that based on the material before him, it was not likely the tribunal would find the communications of 2 and 8 February 2024 amounted to protected disclosures. The alleged disclosure of 2 February appeared to be general criticism of a contract partner rather than the respondent. The 8 February disclosure had some prospect, but lacked sufficient clarity about what was actually said and what it tended to show.
Facts
The claimant worked as Estates and Facilities Officer at the respondent's Marleigh site from December 2021 to July 2024. In January 2024 there was a water safety crisis affecting residents. The claimant alleged she made protected disclosures to the CEO on 2 and 8 February 2024 about failures in the Estate Management Contract and health and safety risks. She was dismissed for misconduct relating to an altercation with a contractor, engaging staff without authority, and a data protection breach by sending work material to her home email.
Decision
The judge refused the claimant's application for interim relief. He found it was not likely the tribunal would find the communications of 2 and 8 February 2024 were protected disclosures, as they lacked sufficient clarity and factual content. Even if they were, it was not likely the tribunal would find they were the reason or principal reason for dismissal, given competing explanations for dismissal and lack of evidence linking the disclosures to the decision-maker's reasons.
Practical note
Interim relief applications require a high threshold of likelihood; vague expressions of concern lacking factual specificity will not meet the definition of protected disclosure, and claimants must establish clear causation linking disclosures to dismissal.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3306483/2024
- Decision date
- 30 October 2025
- Hearing type
- interim
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- charity
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Estates and Facilities Officer
- Service
- 3 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No