Cases6009298/2025

Claimant v Kanlungan Filipino Consortium

1 August 2025Before Employment Judge MassarellaEast Londonin person

Outcome

Other

Individual claims

Whistleblowingnot determined

Interim relief application granted. Tribunal found claimant had a 'pretty good chance' of establishing that the sole or principal reason for her dismissal was that she made protected disclosures about misappropriation of charitable funds and retaliatory dismissal of staff. Full merits hearing not yet determined.

Facts

Claimant was Programme Manager employed from May 2022 at £2,600 per month. She participated in collective grievance in October 2024 alleging misappropriation of charitable funds. Five colleagues who also participated were summarily dismissed in November 2024. Claimant was suspended, then dismissed for gross misconduct in March 2025 after disciplinary process. Dismissal letter placed considerable emphasis on her allegations about misappropriation and that she disclosed these concerns externally to Charity Commission and funders. Respondent disputed she was an employee from May 2024 onwards.

Decision

Tribunal granted interim relief. Judge found claimant had a pretty good chance of establishing she remained an employee throughout, made protected disclosures about misappropriation of funds and retaliatory dismissals, and that these disclosures were the sole or principal reason for her dismissal. Respondent given two working days to notify whether it would reinstate/re-engage, otherwise continuation of contract order at £2,600 gross per month.

Practical note

Interim relief can be granted where dismissal swiftly follows whistleblowing even where employer follows disciplinary procedure, particularly where dismissal reasons focus heavily on the protected disclosures themselves and where colleagues making same disclosures were summarily dismissed.

Legal authorities cited

Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions [1968] 2 QB 497Dandpat v University of Bath UKEAT/0408/09/LAParsons v Airbus UKEAT/0023/16/JOJAl Qasimi v Robinson UKEAT/0283/17London City Airport v Chacko [2013] IRLR 610Williams v Michelle Brown AM UKEAT/0044/19/OONorbrook Laboratories (GB) Ltd v Shaw [2014] ICR 540Twist DX LtdChesterton Global Ltd v Nurmohamed [2018] ICR 731Nethermere (St Neots) Ltd v Taverna [1984] ICR 612Wright v Aegis Defence Services (BVI) Ltd UKEAT/0173/17/DMWhite v Troutbeck SA [2013] IRLR 949Market Investigations Ltd v Minister for Social Security [1969] 2 QB 173Taplin v Shippam Ltd [1978] ICR 1068

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.230ERA 1996 s.129ERA 1996 s.103AERA 1996 s.130ERA 1996 s.43BERA 1996 s.43FERA 1996 s.43G

Case details

Case number
6009298/2025
Decision date
1 August 2025
Hearing type
interim relief
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
charity
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
Programme Manager
Salary band
£30,000–£40,000
Service
3 years

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor