Claimant v Heart and Home Living Limited

The tribunal found that the alleged disclosures lacked sufficient factual content and specificity to qualify as protected disclosures under s.43B ERA 1996. The communications were management concerns about a colleague rather than safeguarding disclosures. Even if protected, there was no causal link between the alleged disclosures and the alleged detriments, which were instead motivated by operational needs and the claimant's imminent resignation.

The tribunal found the dismissal was motivated by the claimant's serious misconduct in failing to follow medication administration procedures, not by any protected disclosures. The claimant admitted she was not present when medication was given, failed to accurately complete records, and did not provide an honest explanation. The tribunal saw insufficient evidence that alleged disclosures played any part in the dismissal.

Despite significant procedural unfairness, the tribunal found on the evidence that the claimant did commit gross misconduct. She failed to be present when medication was administered, allowed inaccurate records to be kept, and potentially allowed a child to hand medication to another resident. These acts fundamentally breached her contract and irrevocably destroyed trust and confidence, justifying summary dismissal.