Claimant v University College London
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the claimant's application for interim relief under Section 128 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was not well founded and dismissed it. Interim relief applications require the claimant to demonstrate a likelihood of success in establishing the underlying whistleblowing dismissal or detriment claim, which was not established here.
Facts
Anna Mkhitaryan brought an application for interim relief under Section 128 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 against University College London and three individual respondents. The claimant represented herself while the respondents were represented by counsel. The hearing was conducted remotely by video.
Decision
Employment Judge E Burns dismissed the claimant's application for interim relief, finding it was not well founded. This was a preliminary application seeking interim protection pending a full hearing, typically in whistleblowing dismissal cases where reinstatement or continued employment is sought.
Practical note
Interim relief applications under Section 128 ERA 1996 require claimants to demonstrate a likely prospect of success on the underlying whistleblowing claim, which this unrepresented claimant failed to establish.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2203338/2025
- Decision date
- 27 June 2025
- Hearing type
- interim relief
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- education
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No