Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the claim for automatically unfair dismissal under section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (whistleblowing dismissal) was not well founded and dismissed it following a three-day full merits hearing.
The tribunal found that the claims for breach of contract were not well founded and dismissed them. These claims were listed twice in the judgment, suggesting multiple breach of contract claims were brought.
The claim arising from section 44 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (detriment in health and safety cases) was found not to be well founded and was dismissed by the tribunal.
Facts
Mr Low brought claims against Cairn Group following his dismissal, alleging it was automatically unfair due to whistleblowing under section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996. He also claimed he suffered detriment related to health and safety matters under section 44, and brought multiple breach of contract claims. The case proceeded to a three-day full merits hearing with the claimant representing himself and the respondent represented by an advocate.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all of Mr Low's claims, finding them not well founded. The whistleblowing dismissal claim under section 103A, the health and safety detriment claim under section 44, and all breach of contract claims failed. Reasons were given orally at the hearing on 24 April 2025.
Practical note
A self-represented claimant's whistleblowing and health and safety dismissal claims failed on their merits after a full hearing against a legally represented respondent, highlighting the evidential burden in establishing protected disclosure dismissals.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 8001182/2024
- Decision date
- 29 April 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Name
- Cairn Group
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No