Claimant v MM Hearing Solutions Ltd trading as 'HearX'
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's application for interim relief under section 128 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The judgment does not provide written reasons as they were given orally at the hearing, but the application failed to meet the statutory threshold required for interim relief to be granted.
Facts
The claimant, Mrs Nader-Sepahi, brought an application for interim relief under section 128 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 against her employer, MM Hearing Solutions Ltd. This was a preliminary hearing held remotely. The claimant represented herself while the respondent was represented by its Head of Development.
Decision
Employment Judge Midgley dismissed the claimant's application for interim relief. Reasons were given orally at the hearing but not provided in writing, meaning the specific grounds for dismissal are not set out in this judgment.
Practical note
Applications for interim relief under section 128 ERA 1996 (typically involving whistleblowing or health and safety dismissals) require a high threshold to be met at the preliminary stage, and this claimant failed to satisfy that threshold.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6022558/2025
- Decision date
- 30 June 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No