Claimant v Huntapac Produce Limited

This was an interim relief application only. The tribunal found it was not likely that the claimant would succeed at final hearing in showing the principal reason for dismissal was protected disclosures, particularly because he appeared to resign due to the conduct itself rather than because he made disclosures about it. Full merits hearing still to take place.

Interim relief refused. Claimant must show respondent fundamentally breached contract because of protected disclosures. Tribunal found it not likely he would establish this, as resignation email suggested he resigned because of the practices themselves (interruptions to rest, app requirement) rather than retaliation for disclosures. Final hearing required.

Tribunal found it not likely claimant would establish protected disclosures, particularly the requirement that he reasonably believed disclosures were in the public interest. Respondent argued these were workplace disputes. Tribunal noted claimant might succeed but did not have a 'pretty good chance' required for interim relief.