Claimant v Minster Home Care Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The claimant applied for interim relief under section 128 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, which relates to dismissals connected to health and safety or whistleblowing. The tribunal refused the application, indicating it was not satisfied that the claimant was likely to succeed at a full merits hearing.
Facts
Mr Ehimen brought an application for interim relief under section 128 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 against his former employer, Minster Home Care Ltd, a healthcare company. The application was heard remotely by video. The claimant was represented by a lay representative, Mr Taiwo, while the respondent was represented by a solicitor, Mr Rogers.
Decision
Employment Judge Brain refused the claimant's application for interim relief. Interim relief is only granted where the tribunal is satisfied the claimant is likely to succeed at a full hearing on claims relating to health and safety or whistleblowing dismissals. The tribunal was not satisfied this threshold was met.
Practical note
Interim relief applications under s.128 ERA 1996 require a high threshold showing the claimant is likely to succeed, and this threshold was not met in this case.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6030566/2025
- Decision date
- 16 September 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep