Claimant v Earth in Common

The tribunal found that the claimant's report on 30 May 2023 that she had been sexually assaulted by a volunteer constituted a protected disclosure, as it was information tending to show a criminal offence had been committed and was reasonably believed to be in the public interest. The respondent subjected her to a detriment (letter of 12 July refusing holiday, threatening dismissal, and imposing a final warning) because of this disclosure.

The tribunal concluded that the principal reason for the claimant's dismissal on 21 August 2023 was that she had made a protected disclosure on 30 May 2023 about being sexually assaulted. The respondent's attitude changed significantly after the disclosure, culminating in dismissal immediately following her grievance about how the sexual assault allegation was handled. No proper reason for dismissal was given to the claimant.

The claimant's report of sexual assault on 30 May 2023 amounted to a protected act under s.27 Equality Act 2010. The respondent subjected her to the same detriment as found under whistleblowing (letter of 12 July refusing holiday and threatening dismissal) because she had done that protected act. The tribunal applied the same findings as for the protected disclosure detriment.

The tribunal found that the respondent did not apply a practice of requiring workers to speak English in meetings. The claimant spoke and understood English, and assistance was available (e.g., Mr Swanepoel at the 8 June meeting). The claimant pointed to no specific disadvantage and did not complain at the time. The claim failed.