Claimant v EMW STax Ltd

The tribunal refused the claimant's application for interim relief. The judge concluded it was not 'likely' (meaning a 'pretty good chance') that the claimant would succeed at a full hearing in proving: (1) that the alleged oral disclosures amounted to protected disclosures conveying information (rather than mere allegations), (2) that they were made in the public interest, and (3) that the principal reason for dismissal was the disclosures rather than the respondent's stated reason of gross misconduct for emailing confidential client data to his personal account. The application was an expeditious summary assessment on untested evidence.

Four alleged protected disclosures were relied upon (March 2024, October 2024, October 2024, November 2024) concerning alleged breaches of tax regulations and questionable professional practices. The tribunal found it unclear whether the oral disclosures conveyed information (as required) or were merely allegations. The tribunal also noted substantial time gaps (up to 12 months) between the alleged disclosures and dismissal, with intervening events (grievance, investigation, disciplinary process) weakening any causative link. The full merits remain to be determined.