Cases2402554/2025

Claimant v Primary Care 24

29 August 2025Before Employment Judge BattenManchesterremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Whistleblowingfailed

This was an application for interim relief pursuant to Section 128(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 in relation to a whistleblowing claim. The tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the claimant did not establish the likelihood of success required for interim relief.

Facts

The claimant S Maison, represented by Dr M Hindle as litigation friend, brought a claim against Primary Care 24, a healthcare provider. The claimant applied for interim relief under Section 128(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, which applies to whistleblowing dismissals. The hearing was conducted remotely by video on 29 August 2025 before Employment Judge Batten sitting alone.

Decision

Employment Judge Batten dismissed the application for interim relief. The tribunal found that the claimant did not meet the threshold required for interim relief in whistleblowing cases, which requires the tribunal to be satisfied that it is likely the claimant will succeed at a full hearing.

Practical note

Applications for interim relief in whistleblowing cases require a high threshold of demonstrating likely success at full hearing, which this claimant failed to meet.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.128(1)

Case details

Case number
2402554/2025
Decision date
29 August 2025
Hearing type
interim
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
healthcare
Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
lay rep